William Lane Craig Lectures on the Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus

This is a long form explanation of the resurrection argument that Dr. Craig makes in all of his debates on the existence of God. The speaker introduction goes for 6 minutes, then Dr. Craig speaks for 35 minutes, then it’s a period of questions and answers with the audience. The total length is 93 minutes, so quite a long period of Q&A. The questions in the Q&A period are quite good.

Introduction:

• Many people who are willing to accept God’s existence are not willing to accept the God of Christianity
• Christians need to be ready to show that Jesus rose from the dead as a historical event
• Private faith is fine for individuals, but when dealing with the public you have to have evidence
• When making the case, you cannot assume that your audience accepts the Bible as inerrant
• You must use the New Testament like any other ancient historical document
• Most historians, Christian and not, accept the basic minimal facts supporting the resurrection of Jesus

Fact #1: the burial of Jesus following his crucifixion

• Fact #1 is supported by the early creed found in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians (1 Cor 15)
• Fact #1 is supported by the early Passion narrative which was a source for Mark’s gospel
• Fact #1 passes the criterion of enemy attestation, since it praises one of the Sanhedrin
• Fact #1 is not opposed by any competing burial narratives  

Continue at  William Lane Craig

Are Homosexuals Born that Way?

In an article found here Alan Shlemon writes: 

Lady Gaga’s mega-hit song “Born this Way” sold millions of copies affirming what many people believe: homosexuality is hardwired. In fact, people think that’s as axiomatic as saying the earth revolves around the sun. No rational person rejects the idea. The only hold-outs, it is said, are either ignorant of science, homophobic, or bigots (read: Christians). But before I explain why this view is beset with problems, let me make a tactical suggestion.

Many Christians get defensive when someone says homosexuality is inborn. I understand the temptation to argue against this claim. But it’s a mistake to try to show it’s false, at least initially. That’s because the claim is not an argument. It’s just an opinion and, therefore, not necessarily true. In order for their claim to become a bona fide argument, it must be supported with evidence or reasons.

So, instead of defending your convictions, make them defend their claim. Simply ask, “What evidence do you have that homosexuals are born that way?” Then wait and listen. This is totally appropriate and not just a rhetorical trick. It’s how the burden of proof works. Whoever makes the claim bears the burden to show it’s true. Since they’ve made the claim, it’s their job to back it up, not your job to prove them wrong.

If they don’t have evidence for their claim, then it’s fair to graciously explain that their view is unreasonable – that they don’t hold their view for good reason. If they do offer evidence for their view, only then is it appropriate to respond with a counter-argument.  Continue at Effectual Grace