Has an Atheist Ever Blown My Mind?

Welcome to a live stream.

Yeah, I'm live.

This is a Q &A that we set up because we have hit 2

,000 subscribes.

Yeah, that's right.

2 ,000.

2 ,000 subscribes.

Cool.

And what I wanted to do was I just wanted to commemorate this moment and thank you all for,

you know, subscribing and staying in line with what we're up to here.

I wanted to invite a very special guest to mark this tremendous occasion.

You may know him from movies like Face Off, from Ghost

Rider.

It's the one and only Nicholas Cage.

Nicholas, here's Nicholas.

Yeah, it's my friend here.

What's that?

What's that, Nicholas?

Hahaha, Nick.

Well, anyway, he's very excited as well that we're here, that we did it.

Hello, CounterCulture, Callum.

Yes, sir.

Well, anyway, let's go ahead and jump right into these questions, you guys.

So I posted in the community tab, I posted a bunch of, or I posted a request for a bunch of

your questions that I can answer.

And you didn't, you didn't let me down.

You asked a lot of questions.

So let me just go ahead and jump in with these questions one at a time here.

Here's the first question.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Before anything else, before I say anything else, I'm supposed to tell you that you should definitely check out our

Wise Disciple store.

So we have merch where you can get cool things.

Take that graphic off.

There you go.

We got cool things like this right here.

And we got more cool things, shirts, hoodies, you know, as it gets into fall, it's going to get a little chilly,

ladies and gentlemen.

So if you want to represent Wise Disciple, which is the ideal that we all should be living up to,

then go to the wise disciple .store and definitely represent.

Well, anyway, let me go ahead and jump into the questions here.

And the first question is just a light one.

You know, just simple.

I love it.

It's the first question is, are you reformed?

Well, the short answer is no.

And I don't think that I've investigated the

reformed tradition enough to say that I'm reformed.

That doesn't mean I disagree with, you know, everything in the reformed tradition.

There are some things that I agree with.

And I think that's all I'm going to say on the subject.

So I understand that this is a little vague, but I'm really not looking to jump into the, you know,

disagreement between James White and Calvinists and, you know, Leighton

Flowers and his camp.

There are a lot of smart guys on either sides of this issue who make great arguments in this area.

I'm not trying to be a voice in that space.

Let me also say this.

The older than I get, because I am pretty old,

so the last four and a half, five years or so, I've focused on understanding

the Jesus of history, really trying to get into what Israel was like in the first

century, you know, what it meant to be an itinerant rabbi as Jesus traveled around, what it meant to be a

disciple of Jesus Christ, you know, how the Jewish community would have understood that

and how the early church really was like, you know, and that led me to do a lot of research to develop materials

and discipleship and all of that.

But the more that I look into this, the more that I realize that the attitude around the time was

that, and you can even describe it this way, was that Jews were considered to be men of two hands,

okay, on the one hand and on the other hand, and they really wouldn't try to

resolve the two apparent issues that cause tension between the two hands.

And so, what I mean by that is, in the Bible, there are a couple of things where it just seems like

there is this, there's these two issues, you know, and for me, at this

point, I really don't have a burning desire to try to resolve tension because I think what it does is

it puts me in a position to trust the Lord even more, to say, you know what, Lord, I understand that everything

you say and do is right and good, and I'm going to trust you on this to figure this out because I know it

makes sense, but I'm not going to try to figure it out.

And so, specifically in this issue, right, if you read the Bible, and again, I don't think I'm saying anything controversial at this point, but

if you read the Bible, you're going to notice two categories.

On the one hand, God is sovereign, and I would argue that we all should affirm that, you know, and take

it at face value when the Bible says that because that's what I do.

But then on the other hand, humans are free, all right?

So, then you have areas where it provides this kind of tension, and again, I

don't seek to resolve that tension, you know, which is not to say that

Christianity doesn't make sense or that we can't provide good apologetics defenses.

There's tons of areas where we can stand and defend the faith and show that Christianity

is the best explanation for the way things are, but in a couple of areas, I'm really not going to try to resolve

these areas.

So, anyway, thank you for the question.

That was probably as clear as mud, so be it.

Jim Amberg.

Oh, by the way, that first question was from someone named Ryan.

Thank you for the question, Ryan.

Second question is from Jim Amberg, and Jim asked me a couple of questions.

The first one is, what are the top three arguments for God that you find most compelling?

Are these also effective with others?

So, you can't—the first one,

it's just, the first argument is unassailable, all right?

And it's the Kalam cosmological argument.

It's got to be, right?

And the reason I like the Kalam is because it

is so short and digestible that it's actually memorizable.

You can actually memorize the Kalam very easily, and you can use it.

And the thing is, you know, there really isn't a way for skeptics,

atheists, whatever, to really deal with the Kalam in a meaningful sense, you know?

And they try, right?

So, the second premise, so the Kalam is, you know, everything that begins to exist has a cause.

The universe began to exist, therefore the universe has a cause, right?

And so, that second premise is usually the one that gets attacked the most, but I would argue

that the science is on the side of the Christian on this one in terms of what

we see, the evidence for the beginning of the universe, and so it really is a strong argument,

the Kalam.

So, I like the Kalam, and what's interesting is, I talked to William Lane Craig, and my team and

I had a conversation with him, and we asked him that same question, what is your favorite apologetics argument?

Of course, he said the Kalam, right?

So, anyway, that's the first one is the Kalam.

The second one is the moral argument, you know?

The moral argument, I think, is also very strong, and it kind of trades on, I guess what,

I mean, if people are really intellectually honest, if they're genuine seekers of

truth, they're going to acknowledge something.

That is that everybody has a sense of morality in them.

It just seems to be that morality is a feature that every single mind on this planet has,

and even when you have skeptics and atheists, they try to sort of, they want to explain this

in some subjective sense.

I would argue that implicitly what they're acknowledging is that we all have this thing, right?

And so, it just requires, if you're a good thinker, it requires some kind of an explanation, and so the moral

argument, you know, seeks to ground morality in something that is transcendent, that

stands over and above every single human being, so that, therefore, we all fall under its

responsibility, its requirement, and I think that's really strong.

So, I would say the Kalam, the moral argument.

Finally, I don't know if this is an argument exactly, but the problem of induction, bringing up the problem of

induction, I think, is a really great way to go, especially with somebody, again, who's a genuine

seeker of truth.

They're not really, you know, interested in this back and forth disputation stuff,

just to be disputational, but they really are genuinely seeking truth.

The problem of induction is something to wrestle with, and so the problem of induction was brought up in one of the debate teacher

reaction videos.

I think it was like a debate between Jeff Durbin and James White and a couple of atheists there.

It got a little crazy.

I was eating popcorn, if you remember, but they brought it up, and it's a good question to ask

because the best of the best atheists have also acknowledged that this is just something that must be

wrestled with, and, you know, so anyway, the problem of induction is that, well, there is this uniformity to

nature.

We do see that the laws of physics, the laws of logic, they were there yesterday, and they're still there

today, and so, therefore, they'll likely be there tomorrow.

Our observations about reality, when we make hypotheses and we look around and we do, you know, we do the

scientific method, we're relying on induction.

That is that the things that we observe will still be there tomorrow.

The laws of physics, the laws of logic.

Well, there needs to be an explanation for this, and as I said before, you know, no atheist or skeptic has been

able to provide a satisfactory explanation because the only one, in my opinion, is that there is a God who

orders the universe in a particular way.

So, those, I would say those three are probably going to be really effective and the ones I

like.

The next question is, what is the single most practical step someone can take today to have better conversations with

others about God?

Let me pause.

There's a conversation going on here.

Thank you all for the interaction there, and I'm still learning how to do live stream and look

at conversations and then also talk.

So, you'll have to bear with me if I do this again.

Yeah.

So, anyway, let me jump into the other question here.

You know, to me, I think this question is the six million dollar question,

all right?

And even what I'm really doing here on YouTube is I'm trying to shine a spotlight on

this particular issue, okay, which is how do I take what I know about God

and Christianity and communicate it effectively to a world that desperately needs to hear it, you know?

And for a lot of you, I would imagine that what you're doing is you're consuming a lot of lectures, a lot of talks, a lot of

debates, right?

You heard that really great thing that William Lane Craig said or, you know, Frank Turek said or some other favorite apologist

of yours said, but there's still this missing step, and I think you all are seeing it, which is, well,

if I just, like, cut that out and then drop it on somebody who I'm talking to, that's not really

effective.

It seems to just bounce off their foreheads and they walk away feeling very satisfied with themselves, you know?

So, it's like, how do I take what I heard, the best stuff from the best guys, and translate it

into effective conversations?

Well, we have a whole series on this.

I have a signature method of communicating the Christian faith, and I hope you guys are checking out those other videos as well as the

Debate Teacher Reacts videos, and we call it first -date evangelism.

So, there's a lot to say, but I'll just say that the single most practical step someone can take today

is to fulfill the shema, you know what I mean?

So, remember when Jesus was, you know, on earth fulfilling his ministry, he was

approached by someone one day who said, you know what, what's the greatest commandment?

Jesus quotes the shema.

Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself, okay?

If we want to be effective, right?

Like, if you want to actually speak in a manner that persuades, then you first have to love the

people that you're talking to, and this is the thing that I think is entirely missing in a lot of

conversations.

I've said this in the past, like on the community tab, and in other places on this channel, but if you think

that you can be just like the guys in the debate videos,

and then just bring that into normal conversation with people, and that's going to be effective, you are sorely mistaken,

okay?

And I think you all know that.

If you go out and you survey how conversations typically work in today's culture, it's a dumpster fire.

It really does not work.

And so, I think as Christians, we have a responsibility.

Look, I'm going to acknowledge something that we all should be on the same page.

The Holy Spirit is the one who does the lion's share of the work.

We don't save anybody, all right?

The Holy Spirit is the one who does that.

However, God in his infinite wisdom has has enjoined

us to come alongside what he's doing here on earth.

And so, in this little area where we have a responsibility, the Bible says that we need to be a certain kind of

person that communicates the gospel, that seeks to make disciples, and that's to love

the people that we're talking to, all right?

That's why it's the greatest commandment.

And so, I think if you do that, and if you do that well, if you love somebody,

all of these qualities are going to flow out of you that will then make your conversations

more productive.

Because if you love the person you're talking to, you'll listen better.

You'll be more patient.

You'll seek to affirm the person you're talking to.

You won't try to be like sharpshooting them like a lawyer in the courtroom and just attack them at every turn, you know?

You'll ask questions to better understand them because you'll care about them.

And that's the thing.

I mean, you know, the Bible has said this.

The Bible has written this thousands of years ago.

And what's funny to me is now the science, you know, in sort of the area of behavioral science is just starting to

figure this out just in the last few decades.

We really are led by our emotions.

Everyone is, you know.

And so, we really need to be aware of that and respect the fact that there is

just this component to communication that requires that we

deal in the area of emotion.

Because God made us to be emotional beings.

We are the intersection of intellect and emotion.

And so, if we acknowledge that, and if we respect that component of emotion, if we love

the person that we're talking to, and I don't mean like, you know, infatuation or something,

right?

I just mean that if you show them that you care about them, you will find your conversations to be a

lot more productive.

I guarantee it.

I've seen this in my own life.

This is my own experience.

As I said, we have a signature method of communicating the Christian faith.

It's based on the teaching methodology of Jesus.

And so, that's my answer.

Let me jump into the next question because we got a lot of questions.

What, in your opinion, is going to be the biggest problem for the American church in the coming year?

How can regular dudes in the pews fight to head this off?

Well, number one, somebody needs to start a podcast called Dudes in the Pews, okay?

Because I think I would subscribe immediately.

But anyway, that's a really good question.

There are a lot of problems.

For the American church, there's a lot of bleeding going on in different areas,

you know?

So, we see, for example, like, woke theology, progressive Christianity, you know, word

of faith heresy, lack of understanding when it comes to biblical

discipleship.

But my thought is to, perhaps, go to the source of a lot of the bleeding, you

know?

Because I think that's probably a better strategy.

There is one thing that, if developed, will counter a lot of the things that I

just mentioned, okay?

And even more than that, all right?

And that's biblical illiteracy.

Underneath a lot of these issues that we're seeing today is the issue of biblical illiteracy.

That's the biggest problem, one of the biggest that we're facing today.

It's the same problem that we've been facing for a while and it explains a lot of what we're seeing now, churches

and Christians who are biblically illiterate.

And I think that the best way that we can sort of deal with this is

actually, also, it kind of spills over into our evangelistic conversations, which is we need to get rid of the

mindset, which is very American, it's very 21st century, that if

it doesn't happen within the time it takes for me to microwave popcorn, then I'm not going to bother,

you know?

We have a very fast, fast food oriented mentality.

If I can't get it done in 90 seconds, then I won't do it.

The thing is, we need to be a lot more patient.

We need to play the long game, okay?

And what I would advocate for is that we focus on our families first.

Focus on the family.

That's something, right?

So, in other words, we as Christian fathers, we need to be catechizing our children.

And catechizing is not strictly a Catholic thing, okay?

It's what we should be doing to train up our children in the way that they should go.

That's biblical.

Our children need to understand the Bible and they need to understand the basics, you know, the

basic doctrine, the basic theology, which is rooted in the scriptures.

Because guess what?

They will grow up.

If we do this right, and if we do this well, they will grow up one day and they'll become the next leaders.

They'll become the next pastors of the next churches, kind of moving forward.

And if their knowledge of the Bible is robust, all of these issues are going to disappear.

I guarantee it.

They really will.

Let me go ahead and take a look at some of the comments.

So, GadgetStop321, thanks for watching, says, I don't think it's possible for anything to threaten Christianity.

There are, however, problems for the church.

Amen.

Right.

I'm seeing a lot, whoops, there's noises going on outside my room.

James CoolKid, hi, Nate.

Hi, James.

Good to see you.

Well, anyway, let's jump back into the questions.

Let me see, we got, if you could set up a debate between a Christian and a non -Christian on any topic, who would it be?

And what would the topic be, dead or alive?

If I go dead, you know what, I'd really like to see Irenaeus versus

a Gnostic, you know, or like one of his Martian interlocutors.

I think that'd be interesting.

I'd love to see the Apostle Paul, you know, I'd love to be a fly on the wall when the Apostle Paul and the Jews would

sort of go back and forth.

You know, in Acts chapter 19, he went to the synagogues, he actively reasoned and persuaded with the

Jews there.

I'd love to see that.

Alive today, if I could set up a debate, let me also say something else, okay, and

it kind of seems weird for somebody like me, but I'm not really like keeping up, I'm

not fresh with a lot of the recent apologetics debates that have come out in the last, I'd say, 10

years.

And the reason is, is because I was focusing on other things, you know, I was a teacher in the classroom.

When I was teaching debate, I mean, like debate is, for those of you that took debate in high

school and college, it's really all -consuming.

I mean, like, you know, particularly like the tournaments and stuff are every weekend.

And so, when you kind of live and breathe that kind of thing, I can't then

turn and also spend my, you know, few minutes I have also looking at debates so I

missed a lot of stuff.

You know, for example, when you guys were suggesting that I do Matt Dillahunty, I'd never seen a Matt Dillahunty debate before

I did the first video.

So, I'm coming in a little fresh, right?

So, Alive today, I think I'd like to see a rematch between Shelley Kagan and William Lane Craig,

right?

Because, and on the same topic, is God necessary for morality, like a straight up rematch?

Because I know a number of you pointed out that William Lane Craig later said that, well, the people

that put together the venue, they really didn't want a debate.

And so, they told him to kind of tie one hand behind his back.

So, let's see him without his hands tied behind his back, so to speak.

Because Shelley Kagan, you know, I mean, his position, I don't agree with,

is still a smart guy.

And so, I like to see that.

That's what I prefer, is somebody who is, you know, on both sides of the

debate, I'm seeing a match of intelligence, you know, an even sort of thing, and the back and forth,

I really do enjoy.

So, I do the rematch there.

Well, let's go to the next question.

Elijah McGrath, thank you, Elijah, for the question, says, what is an argument for God or Christianity that

may not be the most powerful, but you find interesting?

He goes on, for example, I would say the fact that we find so many things beautiful and wondrous is evidence the world is

not just randomly caused.

I would agree with you, Elijah.

I would.

And I was thinking more and more about what is otherwise known as the argument from beauty.

When I was in Hawaii, because, I mean, come on, right?

Like, you go out there, you're amongst the beauty of the nature that God has created.

And it's really hard to find anyone that's going to say, you know what, that's ugly,

right?

And so, I would say that there are two sort of arguments that I find very

interesting, and I'm trying to, like, familiarize myself with them more, because I think for

a genuine seeker of truth, they will resonate with these things.

The number one is the argument from desire, okay?

So, the argument from desire is that, and C .S. Lewis sort of famously

posited this in one of his writings, but basically, like, there is, you know, every natural innate

desire corresponds to something real in the world.

Every natural innate desire that we have corresponds to something real in the world.

But there exists in us a desire which does not correspond to something physical in the

world, and therefore cannot satisfy.

And therefore, there must exist more than time, matter, creatures, which can satisfy

this desire.

I think that's basically how it goes, and that would be the argument from desire.

Now, I don't think that if you're in a conversation with somebody, and there

is this kind of disputational energy, that people are really going to be swayed.

But I think the argument from desire is one of those things where you go around the corner, and you're by yourself, and you're really just wrestling with it.

That's where it becomes a lot more powerful for the genuine seeker of truth.

The second argument is the argument from beauty, as we were talking about, right?

And this argument trades along the same lines as the moral argument, I think, which is, you know, you

show that beauty is objective, and then you ground that in something that

transcends humanity, which is God, right?

And it's kind of the same thing with morality, right?

You're not trying to say that morality is something that is created by human minds, because then it's locked inside a

brain, and it becomes subjective across people.

But instead, you try to argue that morality is discovered outside yourself.

Same thing with beauty.

Now, one argument in particular for objective beauty is, I guess, just by simply, it kind of

trades along the lines of appealing to experience, you know, which, again, is what we do with morality, right?

Morality seems to be this feature in everyone's mind.

Well, so is beauty.

Looking around, and so it really does come down to not the fact that somebody would say beauty doesn't

exist, but that it's a question of what is beautiful, and what is more beautiful, and what is less,

right?

What is beautiful, and what is ugly?

And I think that betrays the fact that beauty is

objective.

And there's a lot more to say about that.

I think I was actually on Cameron Bertuzzi's channel a couple days ago, and he actually has

somebody who just came and spoke about that.

So I encourage you guys to go and take a look at Cameron's video there, and,

you know, and read up on the subject, because this is one of those undeveloped areas of apologetics that, again, I

think it would be actually something that is powerful for someone to wrestle with if they're

genuinely seeking truth.

I think it's a fascinating subject.

Well, let's go on to the next question, which is, what do you, so

Mark asks the question, what do you think of Molinism, bro?

Okay, bro, what do you think of Molinism?

Well, as a system, I think it's pretty tight.

I think it's a fairly solid explanation of God's providential interaction with humanity.

And sort of the way that he puts forth his plans since before the world was formed.

For those of you that aren't familiar, Molinism is the view that the way God accomplishes his purposes,

it trades more on his omniscience, if I can say it that way.

It trades more on his omniscience than his omnipotence.

All right.

So in other words, before God created the universe, he knew everyone's thoughts and actions, because in his middle

knowledge, God knows not only what people will do, but also what they would or would not do in any possible

circumstance, right?

So that's, this is otherwise known as the counterfactuals to human freedom.

And God decided to create the particular world that he did in keeping with his

providential purposes, because it also upholds man's freedoms.

So, you know, there's a lot more to say there, and I'm speaking very quickly, but

that's Molinism in a nutshell.

Like I said, I think the system itself is logical.

The question that I have, and everyone should have this question is, does it make the best sense

of all of scripture?

Because there's no doubt that there, again, there are two categories that we find in the

Bible, right?

Number one, God is sovereign, and number two, man is free.

And I don't think anyone disputes any of those two biblical categories, okay?

So that's where we can at least find common ground.

The problem is one of these categories has to take precedence over the other.

And if you believe that God's sovereignty takes precedence over human freedom, then guess what?

You're in the Calvinist camp, right?

And if you believe that God allows for human freedom to be libertarian, you know, and take precedence

over God's sovereignty in key ways, well, then Molinism is a great explanation for how all of that is accomplished.

By the way, a great book to read about Molinism is Kenneth

Kiefly's book, I think it's called Salvation and Sovereignty, or something like that, you know?

It's a great depiction of Molinism if you want to better understand it.

But that's as far as I'm going to go in this kind of conversation, because, you know, again, there are a lot of smart, great guys who can

delineate these differences a lot better than I can.

And again, I'm not trying to be a voice in that space.

Let's go to the next question.

Giovanni, giving me a softball, okay?

Giovanni, if I'm pronouncing that correct, says, what are your favorite books?

Well, I love to read a lot.

So thanks for the question.

The glasses are not for show.

They are real, and I am a nerd.

So I'm constantly reading.

I'm constantly going through some kind of a book, and I would encourage all of us as Christians to be good critical thinkers and continue to read,

right?

Because the screens, which is ironic because I'm on a screen right now for all you guys, the screens are like

doing something to our brains, right?

And if we spend too much time looking at screens, and we're not reading a book or doing something else

to sort of, you know, give our brain the fuel it needs to be sharp and quick, then we're going to have a

problem.

So, you know, I read a lot.

It's kind of hard to say if I have one favorite, or two or three, actually.

It just depends on my mood and where I'm at right now.

But I will say this, like I said before, in the last about four or five years, I've really focused on

understanding the Jesus of history, because I'm convinced that a better understanding of the

context in which Jesus walked will give us a more vibrant picture of who he is and

what he did.

I've said it before, but the Bible really, to me, is like a coloring book, okay?

And so when we get the coloring book, the lines are very clear.

The images that we have are very clearly drawn.

The problem is the colors are not filled in, right?

And the colors are the context.

And so if you can just know a little bit more about context, historical context, it really does

help to bring the picture out a lot more vibrantly.

And so there are a couple of books in this area that I think are my favorites, and I'll go ahead and give them to you.

The first one is The Forgotten Jesus by Robbie Gallaty.

Really great book, and Robbie does a lot of really great research in just showing you what it was

like to travel with Jesus, you know, what it would have felt

like, you know, to be one of his disciples, and, you know, to better understand what Jesus was

doing.

Some of the difficult sayings that he said that, you know, Christians kind of scratched their head, like, what does that mean, you know?

Another book along these lines is Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus by, I think it's

Tverberg and Spengler.

Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus.

There's a whole series there, you know, Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus, Reading the Bible with Rabbi Jesus,

Walking in the Dust of Rabbi Jesus.

And basically, again, it just goes to give you that first century picture of what it was like to

walk with Jesus, to understand the things that he said better, to get that fuller picture out.

And the last one is New Light on the Difficult Words of Jesus by

Biven.

And all of these books are just going to help you so much, okay?

Are they necessary to understand the Bible?

No.

But will they help you better understand it?

Yes.

And if we are Christians, which I'm assuming you are, that's your goal, is to just

go deeper in your level of knowledge when it comes to the Lord and deeper in your

relationship with God as you serve him.

You'll serve him better if you know him more and love him more.

So, those are my book suggestions.

Let me go to the next question here.

Daniel Payne says, I've started down the path of apologetics and I'll be doing a three -day course with crossexamine

.org in August.

Congratulations, Daniel.

That's really great.

As I look at getting two presentations around, I'd like to discuss topics where I can also use my nerdy interests in

blacksmithing, comic books, and fantasy to depict arguments for things like absolute

morality and truth, as well as answering the problem of evil, which I think is Christianity's hardest to

answer question any thoughts.

Daniel, I think you're on the right track.

The one thing that I've always tried to communicate to others in the area of teaching.

So, something I do behind the scenes is I also teach people how to teach.

So, you know, God has blessed me with having some insights in this area.

You know, one of the last things that happened before I retired from teaching was, I was nominated for

Heart of Education Award for the state of Nevada, which is a, you know, it's a wonderful honor.

So, I try to, you know, do this is the Jesus attitude, right?

Try to replicate so that we all look more like Jesus.

You know, we take the things where Jesus influences us, and then we pass it on, right?

In as much as the content of your message, Daniel, the thing that you want to communicate,

that should not be altered, right?

So, you're not going to change the gospel, you're not going to change the apologetics arguments themselves.

Ultimately, it does come down to the style of translating that content,

which is pretty much all up to you.

Because now for me in the classroom, I would create an air of mystery, okay?

So, this is what I'm getting at.

In the classroom, I created an air of mystery, and there were all these mysteries in my lessons that needed to be

solved for my students.

And I'd invite my students to do the same.

They, you know, let's go, here's our driving question.

Now, let's go see if we can try to answer that question, right?

I'm a huge fan of Sherlock Holmes.

And so, this is one of those things where I'm doing what you're suggesting, which I was incorporating my own personality

into whatever it is that I wanted to communicate to my students.

And it had great effect.

Now, this isn't like foolproof, right?

Because you're never going to be able to get 100 % engagement.

Because that, you know, and seeking that goal is treating people more like robots than real human beings

with their own feelings and their own ideas.

But more often than not, I found success by doing this particular kind of thing.

Years ago in grad school, I read a great book on sort of giving meaningful presentations.

It's called Made to Stick.

I actually still have it.

And let me see if I got it right here.

I'm a professional, so I can get off camera for a split second.

This is the book, Made to Stick.

It's a really great book.

It's by Chip Heath and Dan Heath, all right?

And these guys know about the compelling nature of creating mystery and, you know, capturing

people's attention.

They talk about in the book a science teacher who basically figured out that if he introduced mystery

at the beginning of his class, if he sort of reintroduced it during his lecture, and then he circled back around and

gave the answer at the end, a lot of a sudden, his students were engaged.

I mean, all of a sudden, right?

And so, mysteries are powerful because they create a need for closure, right?

If a door is opened, people need the door to be shut again, right?

So, you have this powerful experience that you give to the students where they go, ah

-ha.

And then even before that, you have that like sort of, you're trying to get this eureka moment, right?

But before the ah -ha moment, you need this kind of huh moment, right?

That's what you need to introduce.

That's what I did in my classroom to great effect.

And again, it traded on my personality.

So, if you can incorporate those elements of what makes you passionate and sort of introducing mystery into your

presentations, mysteries that must be solved, I think you're going to nail it.

I really do, Dan.

So, can I call you Dan?

Are we friends?

So, anyway, Daniel, sorry.

Cross -examination is a great organization, and CIA is, the CIA course is a wonderful opportunity to

hone your skills.

So, great question.

Existential Empathy asked this question, how about, why does nobody talk about Exodus when the issue of does

the Bible support slavery come up?

Why does nobody talk about Exodus when the issue of does the Bible support slavery come up?

Okay, pretty sure God did some heavy plaguing on Egypt because they enslaved the Israelites.

Ah, okay.

That's a fair point.

I wonder, though, if that is going to be very persuasive because of the other passages

in the Old Testament that appear to support slavery.

You know, from a non -believer's perspective, you know, they might push back by saying, well, maybe the

Exodus was more about the fact that God chose a certain kind of people than

the actual notion that slavery itself is wrong.

They might say that, and then you're kind of left with, well, now we got to go back to the general overall

issue of what the Bible has to say about slavery and its attitude on it because there are things to say in

response here.

But anyway, in terms of a tactic of conversation,

it's an interesting choice to talk about the Exodus because you're right.

I mean, God was not happy that the Israelites were slaves, but we might want to be prepared because I think there

might be some pushback from non -believers that'll take us down a different road.

Let's go to Elijah again, McGrath.

Elijah, I was witnessing to a Mormon, and he told me part of his assurance

that he was right is that it felt right.

Okay, here we go, right?

Even being away from his family to do evangelism work, he was so happy because he thought God was helping him through it.

I guess the peace and happiness he gets from it, he interprets as God's stamp of approval.

Now, that's key, okay?

And that's where I would go.

And so the question is, how would you respond to something like that?

Now, as I mentioned at the outset, I have a whole series on our YouTube channel.

I highly encourage you to check it out.

It's called our First State Evangelism series of videos because I actually, in one of them, I talk about what to do in this

particular circumstance with a Mormon.

But let me start here, and I'll say it again.

The typical paradigm of communication is a It's ineffectual, okay?

Because guess what?

Most Christians will do this in this particular circumstance.

They'll say something like, well, you know, the Bible says that you shouldn't trust your own feelings, right?

Jeremiah 17 9 says the heart is the most deceitful above all else, right?

But what happens when we do that?

Have you been there?

Has a Mormon come to your house, you know, whether a friend, neighbor, whatever, or it's like a missionary, and

you did that, you threw the Bible verses at them, what happens?

They fold their arms, and they're ready for you, right?

The Bible verses bounce off.

And so that's what I'm trying to suggest to you guys, and I'm going to keep saying it until I'm blue in the face, but

it's more than simply just giving people pieces of information.

There's more going on here that you need to do that is on your shoulders as a requirement as a good Christian

communicator.

So instead, if you kind of pose a question to this person that they cannot answer,

well, then you're going to have a greater chance of getting them to think.

And maybe even change their mind, right?

Have you ever had that moment where you're in the car, and you're driving home, it's like a half -hour trip, and it

bugs you because somebody asked you something, and you wished you would have said something, or you didn't have in the

moment the right thing to say, and it just aided you the whole entire way home, and you're driving, you're talking to yourself like a

crazy person, right?

That's what you're trying to elicit in your Mormon friend or in the person that you're

talking to.

You're going to ask them a question that they cannot answer, and with the hopes that the Holy Spirit is going to use that to tug on

their heart, all right?

So here's what I would do.

I would ask clarification questions about his feelings, right?

So did you, let me know if I got this right.

Did you say that part of your assurance that you're right about Mormonism is that it feels right?

Is that what you said?

Okay, well, then how do you get from it feels right to therefore it is right?

Can you explain this to me?

Okay, and then make the person that you're talking to, make them show you their math,

essentially, right?

You're just asking them, okay, you got this particular math answer, now show me how you got there.

Because there are all kinds of examples of people doing something that feels right in the moment, but is

actually wrong.

And your Mormon friend, if he's intellectually honest with himself, will recognize that point.

There needs to be some criteria where he can differentiate between his feelings about something and

God, you know, telling him something, or the Holy Spirit, you know what I mean?

So make him show you his math.

How did he get there, you know?

Is it right because it feels right?

And if it feels right, does that mean therefore it is right?

That needs an explanation.

Another way of asking the same question is, how do you know your feelings are of God

and not your own?

Okay, which is kind of the Jeremiah 17, like that's where the question is going.

But you're asking in a way for the Mormon person that you're talking to, to really wrestle with the question.

How do you know your feelings are of God and not your own?

What is the criteria to tell the difference?

And you need to give him space to answer the question, okay?

This is one of those things too, where these kinds of questions should be face -to -face.

I really wouldn't try to do this stuff online because it's very easy for somebody to get this kind of a question and then walk away from the computer

or the device and go do a bunch of research and then come back and respond, right?

But to be caught in that moment and have that feeling of, I don't know how to answer this

question, it's powerful.

It's powerful.

It has the power to change lives.

It really does, all right?

That's what I would do.

Next question.

We're almost done here.

We're almost done here.

Can you believe it?

Proverbs 1 -7 asks this question, Do you have any future plans to engage in any public or online debates?

So, I never proclaim with certainty anything about the future.

I'll just go ahead and start with that.

I've learned my lesson too many times in that particular area, and that's James, right?

You know, do not say, tomorrow I will do this or that thing, but instead, if the Lord wills, right?

I don't know what the future holds in this area, but right now, I don't have any plans to do

something like that.

Just to be transparent with you all, because I really do appreciate you, and I'm really excited to see

that there is a community here, a wise disciple community, if I can call it that, that

is engaged, and you guys want to be better.

You want to be better thinkers.

You want to know your God better, and you want to better communicate the Christian worldview, right?

Well, just to be transparent with you, part of my hang -up is, I just, I don't

want folks to get the wrong impression from me.

Debating is not the way to speak to neighbors, to family members, to co -workers, or to

anyone about Jesus in normal circumstances, and that's where we all are.

That's the vast majority of our interaction, is in these normal circumstances where God places somebody in your life.

You shouldn't debate them, because if you debate them, the walls of defenses are going to come up around the person you're talking to, and they're going to

shut down on you, which is what we are all seeing right now in today's culture,

and so I, you know, it's funny, because I do have this background of debate.

Our First State Evangelism series trades on some of the principles of good debate,

but I, the more I do these videos, I wonder if what you guys are getting from me is

debates are the way to go in normal communication, and I hope that that is not the case, okay?

I hope that you're consuming the other videos that we're making.

That's the first thing, so if somebody sees me go debate now, what are they thinking, right?

It gives me pause.

The second thing is I'm right now currently super

busy.

Like, just to do this live stream right now, it took a lot to rearrange, because for me,

locally here in Las Vegas, my senior pastor, the old senior pastor, he went off

to go on a new mission assignment, and it was very sad, and he has left a gap

wherein myself and some of the other staff members are stepping in to fill in

until there is a new lead pastor that is named, and so I'm doing a lot.

This week, again, just to be completely transparent with you, overwhelmed me.

I had a thought for a split second, maybe I can't do this live stream, so I can't on top of that,

right now anyway, who knows in the future, I can't add research to do a good debate, you know,

and the time to sit down.

That's why I'm turning down interviews with some other people that are reaching out, because part of it is I'm just way too

busy, but this is the season that God has me in, and again, I don't know in the future, maybe things will change, all right?

And I thank you guys for being patient with me.

I really do appreciate it.

Let's go to the next one.

Kevin Small.

Hello, Kevin.

Kevin Small asks this question, what was specifically more egregious about the Tower of Babel than any of the

self -centered, self -edifying things man has done since that warranted a reaction there but

not afterwards?

That is a, that is a interestingly worded

question.

What is specifically more egregious?

Why did God act at the Tower of Babel but not in other situations, and what makes

his action on the Tower of Babel, what makes that act more egregious than anything else that mankind has done?

Kevin, this to me sounds like a why did God do this and not do that

kind of question, and with these kinds of questions, I just have to be honest, I don't know.

I don't know, because what we're talking about is agency.

These are questions of agency, which a lot of atheists and skeptics have these kinds of questions.

Why didn't God make the universe this way?

Why didn't God do this?

Why did God do that?

I mean, those are the only way we're really going to know why God chose to intervene in the

Tower of Babel and not in other areas of man's wickedness, because I see a couple of examples

of actions by mankind that appeared from my vantage point to be more egregious than the Tower of Babel.

You know, I think this is just one of those things where we're just going to have to ask God when we see him one

day.

I'm sorry, Kevin, that's the best that I got.

I don't know.

Let's go to the next one.

What is your opinion of presuppositionalism versus evidentialism?

Well, okay.

Bye -bye, everybody.

It was nice knowing you.

This is where everybody gets upset with me.

I will say this.

I'm of the opinion that we should be Christians with all kinds of methods

of communicating in our tool belt.

We should be like Batman, right?

Batman has his tool belt, and on his tool belt, he's got lots of different tools.

I think we should be like that, and we should be ready to pull out the right tool for the right

person at the right time, and we should have the discernment to be able to figure that out, okay?

I think that there are some great presuppositional style apologetics

questions and challenges that we can pose to the non -believers.

So, I mentioned this before, but like Jeff Durbin and James White, I think they did a really good job in this area.

Are they presuppositionalists?

I think they are.

They debated Ellison Barker on this issue, and they showed that off kind of nicely.

But there are some great evidential arguments that we can use as well to engage others for Christ and defend

the faith.

The problem for me is in trying to say there's only one way to communicate, and all the other ways are

illegitimate.

That's where I just can't go there.

I can't say that.

I don't think anyone can make a biblical case for saying something like that, and I'm

familiar with the arguments, particularly from folks who advocate presuppositionalism, you know?

To me, those arguments are tenuous at best.

So, you know, and if you want, I tell you what, because I really, again, I don't want to, again, the

now stir up Christians and they get upset, but Disciple of Christ, if you want, I can be very much more specific

about my critique against presuppositionalism.

I actually talked about this in our podcast.

If you have no idea, we also do an audio podcast, and I talked about my specific critiques of

presuppositionalism on a previous episode.

So anyway, reach out to me, Disciple of Christ, and I can get more specific.

But let's close.

I got one last question.

Eric Collins asks this question, Has an atheist ever given such a great debate that you walked away

not just thinking he won, but you're wrestling with his points?

No.

Have a great evening, everybody.

Love you.

See you next time.

I think for an atheist to do something like that,

for me, now, at my level of knowledge and experience with these kinds of things, and I'm not trying to sound like I'm

smart, I'm just saying I'm an old man.

I'm getting up there in age.

This person would really have to introduce something entirely novel that I've not heard before.

And it will also have to be a powerful punch, like

right at the heart of the Christian's argumentation.

Because atheist arguments are not new.

They're not new at all.

They're extremely old.

And I just haven't seen anything quite like that.

Like I said, I think Shelley Kagan did a really great job against William Lane Craig.

But you know, again, a lot you pointed out that William Lane Craig kind of tied his hands behind his back.

So maybe they should do a rematch.

I do remember years ago, I was watching, who was it?

William Lane Craig and Sean Carroll.

Go at it.

They debated about the universe.

And I think maybe it was like the multiverse.

This is a long time ago.

And I remember thinking to myself directly after the debate was over that that was

a very nice series of volleys back and forth, you know.

So maybe I should go back.

I mean, that's again, that's one of the apologetics debates that I ever saw in the last probably 10

or 15 years.

I should probably go back and watch that debate.

Actually, you let me know.

Do you think that was a good debate?

I know it's on the list and I'm going to get to that eventually, but you let me know what you think.

And, you know, who knows, maybe one day there will be an atheist and a skeptic who actually does bring

something that is really difficult to wrestle with.

I would like to do that because I think hopefully all of us would agree, atheist, skeptic, Christian, whatever, we

should be trying to get at what is true.

Even if it's difficult, even if it presents these insurmountable

initially obstacles, we should all be trying to get at what is true.

And that should be our primary role in this life

is just making sure that we've got reality correct.

All right.

Well, anyway, thank you so much everyone for watching.

This was very long.

What is this?

Almost an hour.

And so, oh, here we go.

Disciple of Christ.

One last question.

Do you think that there are any fatal flaws in either presuppositionalism or evidentialism?

I've heard some of the precept guys really go hard against evidentialism.

Well, let me, hmm, fatal flaws.

Let me say this.

When presuppositionalists argue against using evidentialism because they say that

evidentialism sort of, it almost like does a little bit too much work for

the atheist.

It almost tries to meet the atheist in a middle ground that is a few

steps too far.

I think I would agree with that, you know.

So, for example, this Mike Lacona debate and Matt Dillahunty debate.

Mike Lacona, part of the issue with Mike Lacona was that he did not take a more presuppositional approach to Matt Dillahunty

because had he done that, he would have attacked Matt Dillahunty's epistemology instead of, like, coming

into that debate sort of presupposing that there was common agreement in some areas of

historiography.

Clearly, there was not because Matt Dillahunty is Matt Dillahunty.

And so, that's where you see Mike Lacona start to falter.

And I say that with all respect, you know, and I don't have Lacona's PhD.

But that's where you get into an issue with evidentialism wherein, you know, evidentialism becomes this thing

where you have to assume that you have this common ground, and that's what I'm just not willing to do with an atheist or a

skeptic that I'm having a conversation with is just assume that we have that.

Because I guess if both of you start with this kind of common ground, then I guess you could kind of get into

this more inductive style level of argumentation, which is it's more about probability, you know, and stuff like that.

But I just don't think that that is wise in a lot of cases.

My argument against presuppositionalism really is a—it's

not so much the style, it's the philosophy that that's the only way that this should be done.

There is a biblical case that is made by presuppositionalists.

Don't get mad at me, guys, okay?

There is a biblical case that presuppositionalists make that I just don't think is a good one, you know?

Romans 121, you know, it talks about the nonbelievers' mind being futile in their

reasoning, you know, and their hearts have become darkened.

Presuppositionalists who try to further presuppositionalism as a philosophy, well, they'll assert that this means that

nonbelievers can't really know anything because they're trying to use their materialistic atheistic worldview

to gain knowledge when the Christian worldview is the only one that accounts for knowledge and reasoning.

And so, ultimately, what the Bible is doing in these particular areas, like Romans

121, but also like 2 Corinthians 4 .4, right?

The God of this world has blinded the minds of the unbeliever, right?

Even Psalm, no, what is it?

I think it's Proverbs 1, you know, the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.

What the presuppositionalist camp will try to do is they're going to say, well, this is more,

it's about how human epistemology works.

And I just, I don't see that.

I don't see those texts being a case on how human epistemology works.

And so, because I don't see that, then I don't see a limitation on just utilizing

presuppositional apologetics and not anything else.

Like I said, I think that we see different styles of communication, whether you're looking at Peter in Acts

chapter 2, whether you're looking at Philip later with the Ethiopian eunuch, whether you're looking at Paul in Acts chapter 17,

whether you're looking at Jesus in certain cases in the gospels, they tend to vary in style.

And so, I think if they vary, then I think we're allowed to vary.

We're allowed to be, as my friend J. Warner Wallace says, mixed martial artists or mixed martial

apologists or something like that.

I ruined that joke.

But anyway, well, thank you so much.

We hit an hour.

And as science tells me, nobody watches anything longer than an hour on YouTube because of attention span.

So, look, if you want to do another Q &A, definitely let me know.

I can do those kinds of things.

Just let me know in the comments below.

If you had more questions and I didn't get to them, I don't want to leave you guys hanging.

So, go back to the community tab and throw your question down under there.

And maybe we can do this again real soon.

But listen, guys, I'm so grateful for 2 ,000 subs.

I'm so grateful because all of those numbers represent a real person that is interacting.

We are interacting.

You see where we are?

So, anyway, I really appreciate you guys.

I hope you guys have a really great weekend.

And I will see you very soon.

See you later.