Reasons Newsletter - 2009 - March/April

• Snowballs and Scripture: the Importance of Structural Integrity by Hugh Ross
• Wanted: Thinking Christians by Kenneth R. Samples
• Addressing Resurrection Alternatives, Part 6 by Kenneth R. Samples
• Stewardship

Snowballs and Scripture: the Importance of Structural Integrity

By Hugh Ross

For a kid in Canada, snow meant snowball fights. After watching several of these battles from a safe distance, I figured out the key to winning—the design and sturdiness of one’s snow fort. Therefore, while other kids in our neighborhood tried to make the best snowballs, I experimented with my fort’s design.

Using various kinds of snow, I built walls then tested them to see how intense a snowball fusillade they could withstand. I soon found out that snow fort strength depends on three factors: the average size of falling snowflakes, the atmosphere’s humidity, and the ambient temperature.

When conditions weren’t optimal, I stayed inside and read. However, when nature cooperated, I went outside to build a sturdy structure, provoke an attack, and then “retreat” to my fort and stash of ammunition.

Constructing a good model to explain the origin and history of the universe and life also requires a well-built structure that can withstand attacks….While the Bible is not a scientific textbook, it contains a great quantity of information about the origin, structure, and history of the universe and life—more than any other religious text. These descriptions also uniquely predict scientific discoveries thousands of years ahead of time. Furthermore, the Bible frequently exhorts readers to discover the Creator’s handiwork in nature, referring to it as a second and complementary revelation from him.

This surpassingly abundant commentary on the natural realm makes the Bible the best possible choice on which to erect a theistic model—one that is scientifically testable. Far from being just another ancient Near Eastern creation myth, the account of the six creation days in Genesis 1, Job 38¬–39, Psalm 104, and Proverbs 8 offers a sweeping, plausible creation narrative. Its structure reflects the classic scientific method.

RTB’s model rests upon four cornerstone inferences from Scripture:

1. Dual Revelation: the Creator’s attributes (truth, love, wisdom, power, etc.) ensure the harmony of his creative works (nature) with his verbally inspired Word (the Bible).
2. Creation purposes: nature fulfills the Creator’s stated and implied reasons for creating.
3. Creation chronology: the Creator transcends creation; the realm of nature has a beginning and an end, a before and an after.
4. Detectability of the divine: close and careful study of nature’s record can reveal evidence of the Creator’s miraculous interventions.

These four inferences lay the foundation for every component of RTB’s creation model. Given their structural significance, the four cornerstones provide the context for understanding some of the most intriguing characteristics of creation.

Adapted from More Than a Theory

Wanted: Thinking Christians

By Kenneth Samples

Critics of Christianity often assert that Christ’s followers have both “soft hearts” and “soft heads.” Or, worse still, in the words of outspoken atheist, Richard Dawkins, “hard hearts” and “soft heads.”
Unfortunately, too many quarters of the evangelical church today provide regrettable examples of anti-intellectualism. Some Christians fail to appreciate the value of, and need to, love God with their entire being—and that includes God’s incredible gift of the human mind.

The United Negro College Fund’s provocative motto is “A mind is a terrible thing to waste.” Christians could understand this as “A mind made in the image of an infinite, eternal, and personal God is all the more a terrible thing to waste.”

According to Scripture, true wisdom, knowledge, and understanding are rooted in reverence for God and his revealed word (Job 28:28; Psalm 111:10; Proverbs 1:7). Intellectual virtues such as discernment, reflection, testing, analysis, and renewal of the mind are biblical mandates (Acts 17:11; Romans 12:2; 1 Corinthians 14:29; Colossians 2:8; 1 Thessalonians 5:21). Therefore, Christians’ overall devotion must include pursuing the life of the mind to the glory of God. Using divinely given faculties to think clearly and carefully about the most important issues of life pleases our Creator.

My new podcast, Straight Thinking, is intended as an antidote for the paralysis known as “Christian nonthink.” Each episode begins with a brief “logic lesson” in which I explore principles of rational thinking and expose fallacies that serve to undercut cogent reasoning. The second portion of the program then applies these logical principles by examining various philosophical, theological, and cultural topics relevant to believers today.

The podcasts are brief (15 to 20 minutes) so listeners can thoroughly process the subjects addressed. Sometimes the content may require a review or two in order to be fully internalized.
It is my hope that Straight Thinking will help Christ’s followers become known for expressing empathy with “soft hearts” and thinking critically with “firm heads.”

View the RSS feed to receive Straight Thinking at podcasts.reasons.org/straightthinking/podcast.xml.

Addressing Resurrection Alternatives (Part Six)

By Kenneth Samples

As Easter approaches, now is the time to address the most familiar escape route from the biblical account of Jesus’ resurrection and its profound implications: the myth hypothesis. Perhaps this alternative gains support from the eventual debunking of popular stories long held as truths—such as the myth that Columbus’s contemporaries believed the Earth to be flat—but it doesn’t withstand these three (among other) tests of evidence and logic.

Notes on the “Myth” Hypothesis

• Oxford scholar A. N. Sherwin-White, a specialist in ancient Greek and Roman history, observes that myth and legend require time to develop. Typically, distortions accrue over the span of two full generations or more. Legend cannot replace fact so long as eyewitnesses remain alive to set the record straight. No such time gap exists in this instance.
• Manuscript evidence indicates the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), which report Jesus’ bodily resurrection from the dead, were written within 30 years—less than one generation—from the date of the event’s occurrence. Source criticism suggests that oral and possibly written accounts predated the early Greek Gospels. This source material bridges the gap even more tightly between the resurrection and its documentation.
• As for the reasoning that typifies arguments against the resurrection, it may best be described as circular: myth hypothesis advocates reject the resurrection because they reject the divinity of Christ, and they reject the divinity of Christ because they reject the accuracy of the Gospels, which they reject because the Gospels report miracles, such as the miracle of the Incarnation (i.e., the divinity of Christ). This circle reveals an underlying anti-supernatural bias. The problem is one of presupposition, not of historicity.

Final Observations
The Gospel accounts stand apart from mythical literature in both content and style. Jesus’ miracles, unlike the bizarre and sometimes frivolous “miracles” of myth or legend, meet legitimate human needs and glorify God the Father. Resurrection myths about pagan deities (Osiris, Adonis, Mithras, etc.), often associated with fertility rites, bear no resemblance to the account of Jesus’ resurrection, nor do they have even a modicum of the Gospels’ historical foundation.What’s more, the apostles staked their very lives on the truth of the resurrection. No amount of torture could shake the certainty of what their eyes had seen. It seems reasonable to base our confidence on theirs.

Stewardship: A New Home for Online Donors

With the rollout of our new website in February we now have a new donor-friendly feature that allows you to make donations at your convenience 24/7. From this area you can also join our Message of the Month partners, set up SMART SUPPORT (recurring) gifts, and find out about different ways to help us increase RTB’s impact. Look for more added features as the year progresses.

Check it out at www.reasons.org/donate.