News

PEP Talk Podcast With Dan Strange

by Solas

When you are sharing the gospel with the people around you, do you think about connecting with them or confronting them? How did Paul approach the members of the culture he worked in? This time on PEP Talk we discuss bringing the gospel into our secular culture with Dan Strange, author of Plugged In: Connecting your faith with what you read, watch and play (available through 10ofThose here).

With Dan Strange – PEP Talk

Apple Podcasts
Spotify
Amazon Music
RSS Feed

Our Guest

Dan Strange is College Director at Oak Hill Theological College and Lecturer in Culture, Religion, and Public Theology.  His books include For Their Rock is Not as Our Rock: An Evangelical Theology of Religions (Apollos, 2014; Zondervan, 2015) and Plugged In: Connecting your faith with what you watch, read, and play (The Good Book Company, 2019). Dan is married to Elly, has seven kids and is an elder at East Finchley Baptist Church.

A Beginner’s Guide to the ‘Best-fit’ Argument: Part One

by Editor

Suppose a murder has occurred. There is a body on the floor. In walk the detectives. What do they do? They make a lot of observations and pick up a lot of stuff. They interview everyone who might have important information. Then, they take all of this back to the precinct and to the lab, and they study it. First, they sort out the stuff. Which stuff is relevant to the case and which is not relevant? They might judge that some bit of stuff is not relevant, but change their minds later. Once they gather what seems most relevant, they try to reconstruct the event. They tell a story to explain all the stuff. By now they start calling the stuff “evidence.” They reconstruct the event by figuring out which story makes the most sense of all the evidence. Which story fits best with the relevant facts?
The detectives may have two or three stories that are most likely. First, Bob may have killed Suzie. Second, Joe may have done it. Third, some other unknown person is the culprit. Here they bring in plausible motives and specific bits of evidence. Since Cindy saw Bob shoot Suzie, it is not likely that Joe is the murderer.

Notice that the detectives do not bring deductive arguments to bear on the case. They are not attempting to prove from secure premises that Bob is the killer. There are few deductive arguments that could be used in this type of investigation. Their approach is more evidential, or, to be more specific, they are using inference to the best explanation to solve the crime.
Given the facts, what is the best explanation for how Suzie died?
Philosophers have a history of approaching problems very differently. We tend to use deductive arguments. A good deductive argument has a valid structure. A valid structure is such that, if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true. Here is an example:
1. All porpoises have gills
2. Eric Clapton is a porpoise
3. Therefore, Eric Clapton has gills.
If 1 and 2 are true, then 3 has to be true. Of course, both 1 and 2 are false. Porpoises are mammals and, therefore, breathe with lungs. Eric Clapton is a great guitar player and also breathes with lungs. Thus, a valid structure is not enough. A good deductive argument has both a valid structure and true premises. If we know the structure is valid and the premises are true, then we know the conclusion is true.
As I said, philosophers have a history of structuring their thinking through deductive arguments. There are advantages to this approach. First, it makes the line of reasoning very clear. Everyone can see what the conclusion is supposed to be based on. Second, it is easy to identify where the work has to be done. Most of the work in a philosophical argument is done in defending the premises.
There are disadvantages to using deductive arguments, however. For one thing, if we discover that one premise is not true, or, more commonly, that it has not been shown to be true, we tend to conclude that the argument is a failure. Thus, we throw it out. Even an argument with a premise that has not been shown to be true may provide evidential support for its conclusion.
How does the inference to the best explanation work? One way to think of this kind of reasoning is that it is about fittingness. In our murder case, the idea that Bob shot Suzie fits well with the various facts we have gathered. The idea that Joe committed the crime, or that some unknown person did it, does not fit as well. Thus, the evidence supports the claim that Bob is guilty over the claim that Joe is guilty.
Notice that in an inference to the best explanation, we take various lines of evidence which contribute to supporting the theory. Thus, we take the eye-witness, Bob’s fingerprints on the gun, the record of his threats and other suspects’ alibis together to support the story that Bob committed the crime.
The idea of facts fitting well with a story is not very precise. Fit comes in degrees. We can specify broad levels of how some piece of evidence will fit with a theory. One fairly strong level of fit has to do with what a theory leads us to expect. For example, if a theory leads us to expect a certain event to occur, and that event happens, then there is a strong fit between the fact that occurred and the theory. The event is evidence that the theory is true. The theory that Bob is guilty leads me to expect his fingerprints and not Joe’s will be on the gun.
An even weaker notion of fit happens when I do not expect the fact, but the fact does not surprise me. Although this level is weak, it still has evidential import. The notion that Bob is the murderer makes us not surprised that people report that Bob often said how much he hated Suzie.
I think we should reason more like the detective in our thinking about the existence of God and other big theories. We take several lines of evidence, and we try to show that the notion of God’s existence provides a better explanation for these bits of evidence than an alternative explanation. If we are correct about the strength of the theistic explanation, we have made a good case that the bits of evidence we have discussed make it more likely that God exists.
After all, the question of God’s existence is going to be an evidential question. We should expect that there will be a variety of lines of evidence at work. In the next article, I shall put this kind of thinking to work.

Gregory E Ganssle earned his PhD in philosophy at Syracuse University. He is currently professor of philosophy at Talbot School of Theology, Biola University. He publishes in contemporary philosophy of religion. His latest book is Our Deepest Desires: How the Christian Story Fulfills Human Aspiration Inter Varsity Press, 2017

Solas Recommends: "Thank God for Western Values"

by Editor

Tom-Holland-Unb_article_imageIn a stunning piece of writing for The Spectator, the respected historian Tom Holland, traces the roots of the ‘western values’ beloved of liberals, secularist and humanists to Christianity in general, and the crucifixion of Jesus in particular.
He writes:
“The wellspring of humanist values lies not in reason, not in evidence-based thinking, but in the past, and specifically in the story of how a cult inspired by the execution of an obscure criminal in a long-vanished empire emerged to become – as the great Jewish scholar Daniel Boyarin has put it – ‘the most powerful of, …..  cultural systems of the world.’
And:
“Because of Christianity, wrote Friedrich Nietzche,”the measure of a man’s compassion for the lowly and suffering come to be the measure of the loftiness of his soul.”…. “That the persecuted and disadvantaged have claims upon the privileged – widely taken for granted though it may be today across the West – is not remotely a self-evident truth. Condemnations of Christianity as patriarchal or repressive or hegemonic derive from a framework of values that is in itself nothing if not Christian”
The full article is a fascinating read, and is available on the Spectator website here. Site registration (which is free) allows the reader access to three articles a week; the full site is behind a paywall.

How Can Christians Still Believe in Miracles? | Andy Bannister

by Solas

“How can you believe in miracles in an age of science?” Are Christians naive and credulous for believing in the miraculous? Has science proved that miracles can’t happen? In this exciting episode of SHORT/ANSWERS, Andy Bannister answers this common question—and even shows you a real miracle, live on camera!

Share SHORT ANSWERS on social media

Please share this video widely with friends or family and for more SHORT ANSWERS videos, visit solas-cpc.org/shortanswers/, subscribe to our YouTube channel or visit us on Twitter Instagram or Facebook.

Support us

SHORT ANSWERS is a viewer-supported video series: if you enjoy them, please help us continue to make them by donating to Solas. Visit our Donate page and choose “Digital Media Fund” under the Campaign/Appeal button.

Book: A Better Story: God, Sex & Human Flourishing

by Editor

Glynn Harrison who was until recently Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Bristol, is also a Christian with orthodox/conservative Christian views about sexual ethics, family life and so forth. This unusual combination of expertise and convictions come together in his rather unusual book: A Better Story.

It is important to grasp who this book is aimed at, in order to appreciate the contribution it makes to these discussions; and understand what this book is not, as well as what it is. Beginning with the ‘what it is not’ then, A Better Story is not a detailed biblical or theological argument as to why Christians should continue to maintain their traditional ethics. Neither is it a defence of the procedure of deferring to the Bible, as the final authority for a Christian or a church’s faith and practise. So, if you are looking for a book which engages with liberal theology (which seeks to move the ethical debate beyond the Bible), or with the ‘evangelical left’, (and radically revisionist readings of scripture); this is not the book for you. Rather, in these pages, Harrison writes for people who have reached broadly similar conclusions to himself about these foundational matters; but who struggle to relate these to the contemporary world.

Harrison manages to achieve these aims with great skill, combining serious academic rigour with remarkably accessible language; while also coupling orthodoxy with pastoral sensitivity. This makes the book worth reading in itself; however there is more. A Better Story isn’t a church rule book, or a blue-print as to handle awkward ethical dilemmas in the life of the church. In fact, in his discussion of matters such as the case of a polygamous family who became Christians and sought to join a church; he demonstrates just how difficult these matters are. But this book is not a short-cut, which will offer a church a series of answers with which to avoid thinking; rather it is an invitation to think long and hard about what it means to be a biblical church in the particular circumstances in which we now find ourselves.

The book is divided into three sections, and within these, each chapter comes with a helpful summary at the end. These are especially useful for reminding the reader of the main points of earlier chapters, when the book moves so rapidly from one area to the next.

Section One explains the so-called ‘sexual revolution’ not just in terms of social history, but also in philosophical and theological categories – including the re-emergence of Gnosticism, and the triumph of hyper-individualism, how moral systems are constructed and propagated, and the effects these changes have had on society and individuals. A particularly fascinating chapter explains to the church how to adjust to being a ‘cognitive minority’; who need to spend more effort in maintaining group ethos, than a previous generation of Christians who generally swam in cultural waters moving in the same direction as themselves.

Section Two begins with a critique of the church’s dealing with sexual matters in the light of the sexual revolution he mapped out in section one. Interestingly, Harrison is not entirely negative in his assessment of all the changes brought about by the sexual revolution, noting that prior to it, the linking of sex with shame and secrecy was as unbiblical as what replaced it – and that the church was frequently complicit in this error. Then Harrison turns his attention to the effects of the sexual revolution revealing some interesting research which suggests that “the sexual revolution promised more and better sex, but failed to deliver”. While sex might be more visible in the media, and all over social media, and society has become increasingly porn saturated; surveys suggest that the amount actual sex taking place, and people reporting sexual satisfaction is dropping. The value of, and decline in the institution of marriage is examined next, with an array of studies cited demonstrating the correlation of marriage with a whole host of benefits (without assuming crass cause and effects where they can’t be demonstrated). One finding is of particular significance. Harrison notes that while the middle and upper-classes have led the liberal assault on the primacy of the marriage relationship and its historic definition; they continue to have higher rates of marital stability. On the other hand, the more vulnerable socio-economic groups have embraced this cultural shift, and failed to capitalise on all the demonstrable social goods that flow from the institution. Finally, in this section, Harrison turns his attention to the nature of identity – as it is today located in radically individualistic terms; and where the search for ‘authenticity’ is seen as a turning inwards to one’s individual perception of their true-self; as opposed to an outward view in which external verification is sought, from biology, society, or God.

Section Three is where Harrison turns his attention to the distinctive Christian response to these issues; where the three subjects of the book’s subtitle (God, Sex, Human Flourishing) come together. He develops several lines of argument, all of which are rich with ideas, insights and wisdom. His first task is to start with the basic Christian message, and to demonstrate the way in which the gospel provides a context and meaning for the whole of life; a big story of which the issues at hand are but a part. The concept of human flourishing which emerges here is that of redemption by Christ, and growth into his image, secure in his identity. Harrison then addresses how human sexuality is an important part of that flourishing, both as expressed in the covenant of marriage, and equally in the single life. Both, he demonstrates equally reflect different aspects of the gospel narrative, and the nature of God. As such, sexual desire should be shorn of any shame, and singleness of any social awkwardness, because both are important parts of what God planned for us, and things with which we glorify him. He moves on to look at the importance of marriage, family and church community as medium-level institutions, in which human flourishing is promoted. These are the opposite of the echo-chambers of social media where people mix in circles of people just like them; but where long-term relationships are forged with people we might not always choose! Then, he takes the church to task for failing to address this radically positive view of sexuality in the Christian life, (in other words only being known for what we are against), and states that every church should have a programme supporting marriage and parenting!

A thread running through all this material is that of the importance “story”, of narratives which define the argument, which have more power than just facts in moving and persuading people. By this, he doesn’t just mean individual stories (important though they are), but also the narratives which are used to define debates, and interpret cultures. A dominant narrative today might be that we have finally thrown off the shackles of Christian guilt and can enjoy and explore sex more fully than previous generations. This is the sort of narrative that Harrison is challenging in this book; but he is anxious to tell us that we cannot do so just by quoting reports, and statistics alone – but that we need to construct and tell “a better story”. On pages 180-182, he maps out what this better story might look like. It begins like this:

…
And continues, mapping out what a Christian and biblical view of human sexuality and flourishing looks like today, concluding with a repudiation of ‘Christendom’ style models of imposing our morality on others, in favour of a more gracious invitation to all to join us on this path.

For people and churches who share Harrison’s core convictions, “A Better Story”, is essential reading, as it is insightful, wise, scholarly, accessible, stirring to read and challenging the church both to faithfulness to its message and to repentance for its errors. It gives unusually clear access to complex areas of discussion and social analysis, without dumbing these issues down. It also gives orthodox Christians a great guide for beginning to think more engagingly and creatively about these difficult subjects. Christian morality will no doubt continue to be accused of being limiting, oppressive and harmful; but Harrison believes that it is enriching, and good for us all. For those who do not share Harrison’s starting point, he provides a suggested reading list under various headings which explore these ideas in greater detail. This book deserves to be widely read – not least by revisionists who wish to move Christian ethics away from its biblical roots, and towards contemporary norms. Engaging with Harrison would be a helpful way for such folks to at least understand their opponents! The book also deserves to be widely read by those in broad agreement with Harrison; not least because doing so will help to prevent them either avoiding these issues and handing the ground by default to the wider culture, with all the problems that involves; but also because Harrison is a wise-guide in helping to ensure that such engagement will not be crass, controlling, or involve resurrecting the shame-culture of a bygone age.

You can purchase A Better Story from the Solas partner page at 10ofThose.com

Glynn Harrison was Professor and Head of the Department of Psychiatry, University of Bristol, where he was also a Consultant Psychiatrist. He now researches and writes about the relationship between Christian  faith and psychology, neuroscience and psychiatry.

PEP Talk Podcast With Brian Brodersen

by Solas

This time on PEP Talk, Andy and Kristi chat with pastor and teacher Brian Brodersen about avoiding pressure, using your personal story, brief conversations and seeing yourself as a small step in others’ faith journey.

With Brian Brodersen – PEP Talk

Apple Podcasts
Spotify
Amazon Music
RSS Feed

Our Guest

With a history of church planting in the USA, England, Eastern Europe and the former USSR, Brian Brodersen works with the Calvary Chapel network. Today he serves as the senior pastor of Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa in California. Here in the UK, Brian teaches through the “Back to Basics” programme on Premier Radio and serves as Festival Director for Creation Fest.

A Beginner’s Guide to the Argument from Contingency

by Editor 1 Comment

Chilli Rating: ? ? ?

Every day we’re used to asking about where things come from.  There’s an answer to a child’s questions like: “where do babies come from?” (and it doesn’t involve cabbage patches or storks) … or “where do Christmas presents come from” (and they don’t come from workshops at the North Pole).  In today’s ethically minded society, we are encouraged to think about the origins of the things we buy.  They didn’t just appear out of thin air on the shelves in our local shops.  In fact, some companies make a big deal in their advertising telling a story about the journey taken by our food or clothing products.
The argument from contingency is not so much interested in questions like “where do your eggs come from” – but in questions like: “Why is there something rather than nothing?” and “Where has the universe come from?”
In ancient times, one of the prevailing beliefs was that the universe had always existed – matter and energy were eternal.  However an altogether different perspective took the world by storm when the prophet Moses declared these astonishing words in the 15th century BC: “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1).  Moses would also pen this meditation: “Before the mountains were born or you brought forth the whole world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God” (Psalm 90:2).  Suddenly the existence of the wonderful and beautiful world around us was explained by the intelligent mind, creative imagination, and powerful will of the Eternal God of the Bible.  No longer was it a conundrum to ask which came first: the chick or the egg – instead God had created the chicken with the egg already inside ready to be laid.  Later, the New Testament would identify Jesus Christ as this same eternal God: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made” (John 1:1-3).
Fast forward to the 21st century AD, it is widely accepted among scientists that the universe had a beginning in the distant past.  Also it is a widely accepted point of logic that anything that begins to exist must have a cause.   Therefore, the argument from contingency draws from these two principles that the universe exists because God exists and decided to create it.  He is the one self-existent or necessary Being that explains everything else.
Maybe that sounds too simple?  Not everyone is convinced by it.
For example, in 2010 Dr Stephen Hawking, released a new book (The Grand Design) which was widely reported in the press because he asserted that there was no longer any need to believe in God who created the universe.  Instead he asserted that the origins of the universe can be explained by its own compelling laws of physics. But this overlooks something so important: laws require a law-giver.  Physical laws are just a mechanism by which the universe works, but they did not make themselves – and we all know that mechanisms require a maker!
Again, in 2006 Dr Richard Dawkins wrote a best selling book (The God Delusion) which cross-examined the argument from contingency by essentially asking: “And who made God?”  The short answer would counter that because God is eternal, without a beginning, He has no cause and there is no need for any further explanation for His existence.
If that does not satisfy you, then consider this: there must be an ultimate reality which we accept as a brute fact.  Sometimes the only way to exhaust a child’s endless “why” questions is the brute answer “It’s just because things are that way”.  In the same way, there must be some self-existent, necessary, ultimate reality.  But is it an eternal God or an eternal universe?  Is it everlasting mindless matter or the everlasting mind of God?  Both of these are belief systems – each involves an element of faith.  As a friend once posted on Twitter “Christians believe in the virgin birth of Jesus. Materialists believe in the virgin birth of the cosmos. Choose your miracle”.
So the remaining question in the argument from contingency is: which of these explanations makes best sense of reality?
I would suggest that the universe of time and matter makes best sense if it was created by Someone who was eternal and immaterial, who was spirit rather than matter.  The order and design we discover in the world around us suggests that They are intelligent and purposeful.  The fact that humans are personal and rational testifies to the fact that we are made in the image of a Being with personality and mind.  The cherished values of love and justice in our society reveal more about the character of the Creator.  This is not just some nameless and faceless deity – rather He steps into time and history in the person of Jesus Christ to introduce Himself to us.
Why is God a self-existent or necessary being?
He existed before creation and He caused creation to exist

David Nixon lives in Edinburgh, where he is a pastor of a city centre church and engaged in apologetics and public theology ministry.  He is married to Kirsty, a doctor, and they have two little boys: Joel and Daniel (who ask the hardest questions ever!)

Further reading:
Lee Strobel: The Case For A Creator (Introductory)
John Lennox: God’s Undertaker: Has Science Buried God (Intermediate)

Stirling, Students and Stunning Scenery!

by Editor

 

Our friends at Stirling University Christian Union (SUCU) are a great bunch of students whose mission is to ‘give every student at Stirling the opportunity to hear and respond to the gospel of Jesus’. They are a diverse bunch too, with members from all parts of the UK, Europe, North America and beyond; add to that that they are drawn from all kinds of different churches too.
I had the privilege of joining 65 or so of the SUCU students for their annual houseparty. Having outgrown their usual venue near Aviemore, this year we all met at the Compass Christian Centre in Glenshee. Surrounded by mountains, bathed in crisp autumnal light, the setting was idyllic!
The aim of the weekend was for the students to spend time in worship, fellowship and Bible-study, to set them up for a year of mission ahead. My part was to lead four Bible teaching sessions, which was both hugely enjoyable and quite a challenge. It was joyfully exhausting!
‘Evangelism’ and ‘Discipleship’ are often separated in church life, and are run by different people, or are seen as different departments in ministry programmes. It’s important not to overemphasise the differences between the two, but to also see the ways in which they are deeply interconnected.
The church’s mandate for evangelism comes from Jesus himself, who said:
“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” (NIV)
The command isn’t just to make disciples, but also to teach them. Part of that teaching has to be about the importance of evangelism! Evangelism is done by disciples, evangelism should be about making more disciples, discipling must include evangelism! The two are deeply interwoven.
On the weekend we focused both on the heart and some practicalities of discipleship; especially as related to some big issues such as money, sex, power and friendship. We examined the way in which different characters in the Bible handled these things, two were warnings about getting it wrong (the Rich Young Ruler with money, and King David with adultery), and two characters who got it right; (Barnabas with spiritual friendship, and Jesus himself with power in Philippians 2).
King David’s case is particularly significant. Early in his career the Bible commends him for his “heart”. He was chosen over his brothers, because The Lord didn’t take heed of outward appearance but “looked at the heart”. Then later David is commended over Saul, as a suitable King as he was “a man after God’s own heart”. When he fell into sin, the prophet Nathan rebuked him saying that he had shown utter contempt for the Lord – in other words he had lost his heart for God. Little wonder then, that when he turned back to God, he prayed, “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me”. Proverbs adds, “above all, guard the heart, as it is the wellspring of life.” The good news of the gospel is that Jesus really does ”forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness”. He cleanses our hearts and sends out in mission!
I was impressed with the way that the students, as well as having heaps of laughs, games, sport, music, a bonfire, and a ceilidh were really engaged with the Bible teaching, small groups studies and prayer times too. It was also great to chat through some of the issues and pray with one or two of them as well. At Solas we’ll be praying for the Stirling University Christian Union as they go forward in mission, with things like the “Mark Drama” and “Uncover” and look forward to working with them again later in the year.

Do All Good People Go to Heaven? | Andy Bannister

by Solas

“If God does exist, then surely all I need to do is try and live a good, decent life.” Somebody once quipped that “good-person-ism” is the most common religious belief on the planet. But do all good people really go to heaven? The latest SHORT/ANSWERS video tackles one of the most common assumptions about religion …

Share SHORT ANSWERS on social media

Please share this video widely with friends or family and for more SHORT ANSWERS videos, visit solas-cpc.org/shortanswers/, subscribe to our YouTube channel or visit us on Twitter Instagram or Facebook.

Support us

SHORT ANSWERS is a viewer-supported video series: if you enjoy them, please help us continue to make them by donating to Solas. Visit our Donate page and choose “Digital Media Fund” under the Campaign/Appeal button.

A Beginner's Guide to Apologetics: Introduction

by Editor 1 Comment
“A Beginner’s Guide to Apologetics” is a BRAND NEW series of articles introducing reasons for belief.

Opponents of the Christianity frequently misunderstand what faith actually is. Richard Dawkins infamously caricatured faith as ‘belief without evidence’. This, as is repeatedly pointed out, is not a definition which anyone who actually possesses faith would remotely recognise or accept. Neither is it a definition of faith that any theologian or competent philosopher would use. Such a definition is possibly one of the most strawy of straw-men ever to have been deployed by a public intellectual.
The truth is that there are many Christian people who are confident in their belief in the existence of God, and His intervention in this world in the person of Jesus Christ; because that is where the evidence and the argument have led them. The term ‘apologetics’ simply means looking at some of this evidence and argument and exploring those reasons for belief.
The world of Christian apologetics is rich in top-flight scientists, philosophers and ethicists; usually defending their positions in academic debates which are often inaccessible to the general reader. While the case against Christianity has been very loudly articulated in the public square, too often the good reasons for belief have been hidden from view.
This series of articles entitled “A Beginner’s Guide to Apologetics” sets out to explain some of the most important lines of evidence and argument for Christian faith, in straightforward terms. The aim of this series is to equip the Christian reader with an array of approaches to use in speaking confidently about their faith.
In order to do this, we have assembled a range of scholars who are experts in their fields, such as scientists, mathematicians, philosophers, and historians. We have asked each of them to explain in accessible terms, but with academic rigour, why there are good reasons to believe; found within their discipline. The articles do vary a little in their complexity, (but none of them are long reads). As such we’ve given each piece a rating from 1-5, where the most introductory pieces are given one chilli ?,  while a 5-chilli article will require a little more effort ? ? ? ? ?. We also want to say a huge “thank-you” to all those who have written these pieces for us all.
Most non-believers, and sceptics today seem to assume that Christian reasoning relies on the ‘god-of-the-gaps’. That is to say that we invoke a deity to explain things for which science has not yet provided an answer. In this view, the medievals saw disease as the result of divine wrath, but we now know that its’ cause is biological. As such the ‘need’ to invoke God reduces as knowledge grows – or so it is claimed. Many Christians are ill equipped to deal with this challenge and so here in this series we will see that, from the fine-tuning of the universe, to the existence of physical laws; science itself provides a compelling case for God. This is the God of the universe, not the god of the gaps.
Most non-believers and sceptics today are also well-versed in the sins, failures and hypocrisies of religion, and rightly ask ‘who needs faith to be good?’ Yet, Christians are not always quick to grasp that the very concepts of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ which their critics invoke have deep roots in Christian thought. This series will demonstrate that human rights and dignity has its surest foundation in a Christian world view.
This series will help Christians to see that there are many positive reasons to believe. Apologetics is not just about defence of the faith from criticism, it is also about filling Christians with the confidence to share their faith with others, in a winsome, yet persuasive way. It is our prayer that this collection of essays will stimulate thousands of positive gospel conversations, in which ordinary Christian people are given robust, but comprehensible arguments for belief.
At the end of each article, along with a short author biography there will be a list of further reading suggestions to enable you to  explore the topic further. These will be from introductory to specialist levels, but labelled accordingly.
We hope you really enjoy this forthcoming series, look out for the articles appearing fortnightly over the coming months!

As a New Year beckons… 

by Editor

When we look back at the past, many people will remember the political upheavals that have dominated the national news. For others, national headlines fade into insignificance behind events closer to home; births, deaths, triumphs and tragedies alike. For all of us, the end of the year is a time to look back, to reflect and learn; to look ‘now’ and take stock of where we are; and to look forward to where we need to go, as the future beckons.
Centuries ago, a man did exactly that and his wisdom is recorded for us in Psalm 90. This ancient piece of writing calls us to renew our focus on God, orientate ourselves around Him; thank Him for every blessing that has gone before; examine our relationship to Him today; and to trust Him for what is to come.
You can read the whole Psalm here:

Looking back:

Moses begins his prayer retrospectively.
1 Lord, you have been our dwelling place
throughout all generations.
2 Before the mountains were born
or you brought forth the whole world,
from everlasting to everlasting you are God.
Here there are two controlling thoughts. The first is that we have only come this far because The Lord has been with us. Whatever our experiences have been up to the present moment; we are here by the grace of God. The second is that God’s faithfulness to His people through the years, is predicated on the fact that God himself is eternal. While the Psalmist eases his way through grand poetry to make his point, my kids used to love the children’s song which said, “Our God is a Great Big God – and He holds us in his hands”. The prose is not so lofty, but the point is identical; God has held His people; and is able to do so because his arms are everlasting.
I remember as a youth reading Charles Finney’s lectures on revival. I came later to move away from much of his theology; while continuing to long for much of his experience! The part of those lectures which remains most strongly with me, is an exercise entitled “Breaking Up the Fallow Ground”, which the singer Keith Green had summarised and popularised. The first part of that involves writing a list of all the things for which you have never specifically thanked God, divided up into categories to focus the mind. I remember sitting at my parents’ dining room table with a pen and an A4 pad of lined paper, thinking “this won’t take long”.  A couple of hours later, with this enormous list of blessings in nature, health, church, family, school, leisure, material possessions and spiritual blessings – I realised that I was something of a selfish, ungrateful brat in the House of God. I had simply taken for granted the many, many things God had given me. These were not things I had earned or deserved, or had any right to possess but were simply the overflow of the love of God towards His creation which had reached me.
While there are pains and disappointments from 2019, we need to look back not only with regret; but balance this with a healthy gratitude to God, for all He has provided. My general, vague sense of gratitude was brought into sharp focus when I wrote down all the good things for which I had never specifically given thanks. The end of the year is an ideal time to look back, and to give thanks.

Looking “now”

The Psalm then looks at the “now”. Moses examines where he stands before God at the very moment that he cried this great prayer, and he gives powerful and eloquent voice to two profound themes, in comparing himself (and all humanity with him) to God.
The first comparison is in scale (v3-6) such as:
3 You turn people back to dust,
    saying, “Return to dust, you mortals.”
As he stands addressing the God who is timeless, and unrestricted, his first impulse is look up the glory of God and stand in wonder. His second is to look down at his frail mortality and to adopt an attitude of deep humility before Almighty God. This is Psalm 90’s reality check for us. While humanity is honoured to bear the image of God, we are not God. At the year-end, many people take stock of whether their life-plan is on track; progress being made in careers, relationships, or mortgage payments (and there is nothing wrong with any of those things). However, this Psalm calls us also to ask ourselves if we hold God in ‘awe’ as He deserves. Few words have been so eviscerated of their content than “awesome”. There was a time when perhaps the Himalayas, or the Grand Canyon might qualify for the adjective; whereas now even a slice of pizza can declared to be so. However, invoking the genuine meaning of the word; perhaps the most profound question we can ask ourselves is whether we see that God is truly awesome.
The second comparison is in quality (v7-11) such as:
7 We are consumed by your anger
and terrified by your indignation.
8 You have set our iniquities before you,
our secret sins in the light of your presence.
9 All our days pass away under your wrath;
The Psalmist is struck here, not just by the scale of God, but by His purity and holiness. This in turn creates a deep sense of his own unworthiness before God. As he considers the perfection of God, his own sins; which once seemed trivial and of no consequence, loom large.
As we take stock of our lives, Psalm 90 summons us to assess our sins, as they are before God. Tellingly, the Psalmist is as burdened by his secret sins, as much as by his more public failures. He is not so much worried about shame before other people, as much as by the fact that he was not in a right relationship with God.
As we discern patterns of thought, speech or behaviour which fall short of the standards of God in our lives, these verses point us in the right direction.

12 Teach us to number our days,
    that we may gain a heart of wisdom.
“Give us the wisdom to live well!”, the Psalmist cries, recognising that that depends on humility before God. I can think of no more appropriate a prayer for the start of a new year than that.
Then:
13 Relent, Lord! How long will it be?
    Have compassion on your servants.
One of the greatest blessings that God offers us is forgiveness of our sins. The Psalmist knows that the judgement of God as something very real and serious. Furthermore, while some Psalms call only for God to judge Israel’s enemies, this writer is concerned with his own sins.
As New Testament Christians, we have a renewed certainty and assurance that when we trust Christ, and confess our sins, “he is faithful and just and will forgive our sins, and cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:8-9). This is because while the Old Testament believers knew that God would one day make some great provision for salvation in the future; New Testament Christians have seen it. Jesus, the son of God, gave his life at the cross, ‘as a ransom for many’. Such certainty does not mean that we take sin any less seriously than Psalm 90, or think that God will not judge; but it does mean that we have confidence that when we pray “Relent O Lord… have compassion on your servants”, that He has and He will!
Tim Keller expressed it beautifully when he wrote:
“The gospel is this: We are more sinful and flawed in ourselves than we ever dared believe, yet at the very same time we are more loved and accepted in Jesus Christ than we ever dared hope.”
The upshot is that as we examine our hearts before God in his eternal nature, and his Holiness, and inevitably find fault in ourselves; we can be made right with Him. In the grace of God in Christ, we can be right with God now.

Looking Forward (v14-17)

14 Satisfy us in the morning with your unfailing love,
    that we may sing for joy and be glad all our days.
15 Make us glad for as many days as you have afflicted us,
    for as many years as we have seen trouble.
16 May your deeds be shown to your servants,
    your splendour to their children.
17 May the favour[a] of the Lord our God rest on us;
    establish the work of our hands for us—
    yes, establish the work of our hands.
As the Psalmist looked forward, he didn’t place his hopes and aspirations primarily in the nation,  or in political, economic or relational successes. Rather, he looked to God for satisfaction in life, joy, love and gladness – and redemption from all the troubles in life which had burdened him. He also longed to see the glory of God revealed on earth. He wanted to see God’s favour on the people and for God to grant him success in the work he has ahead.
These words should be on our lips as we face uncertain times in 2020. We do not know what will happen in politics, economics, culture, or in the world. We don’t even know what will occur in our own bodies, families or homes. Yet, we entrust all these things to The Lord, asking Him to give us His love, joy, peace, hope and satisfaction. Minnie Louise Haskins famously wrote: “And I said to the man who stood at the gate of the year: “Give me a light that I may tread safely into the unknown.” And he replied: “Go out into the darkness and put your hand into the Hand of God.”
Like you, we each have specific callings from God, and particular skills and gifts with which to get to work. Here at Solas, our particular calling is to share the gospel of Christ, and to help the church to do the same. Each of us who work for Solas, also has families we are part of, and churches in which we serve. In all these spheres, our prayer must be v17,
17 May the favour[a] of the Lord our God rest on us;
    establish the work of our hands for us.
So please join us, as one year fades, and another rises. Firstly looking back, and thanking God for every blessing past. Secondly looking ‘now’ and making sure we are right with God, and then looking forwards, trusting God, and looking to Him, for love, joy, hope, satisfaction and fruitfulness.

What Makes the Perfect Gift? | Andy Bannister

by Solas

One of the biggest pressures at Christmas can be finding the perfect present for a loved one. In this special Christmas episode of SHORT ANSWERS, Andy Bannister discovers the key to the perfect gift—and shows how the gift of Jesus that first Christmas meets every criteria. Happy Christmas from all of us at the Solas Centre for Public Christianity!

Share SHORT ANSWERS on social media

Please share this video widely with friends or family and for more SHORT ANSWERS videos, visit solas-cpc.org/shortanswers/, subscribe to our YouTube channel or visit us on Twitter Instagram or Facebook.

Support us

SHORT ANSWERS is a viewer-supported video series: if you enjoy them, please help us continue to make them by donating to Solas. Visit our Donate page and choose “Digital Media Fund” under the Campaign/Appeal button.

Engaging with Pullman, Part Five: Pullman on Alienation and the Argument from Desire

by Editor

Recently I was listening to a piece of music (“Jesu Joy Of Man’s Desiring”) composed by J.S. Bach and performed by The Celtic Women.  It caused my heart to soar and my body to move along with the melodies.  I wanted to reach out my hands as if to touch the music.  It left me thinking for days: I wish I could play the violin, so that I could experience playing that beautiful piece of music.  I felt envious of the talented musicians who (after sacrificing much time and energy to master an instrument) where so much closer to getting inside and becoming one with the music than me.  Suddenly the spectacle of people playing “air guitar” made sense – they want to become one with the music by imitating the actions necessary to create it.  Let me assure you that these were not ordinary thoughts for me!
However, it got me thinking about the fact that there are many experiences of beauty in the world around us which draw out the desires of our hearts.  We wish we could become one with the music; we wish we could bath in the light of a rainbow; we wish we could capture the beauty of the distant hills in a painting.  However, these beauties remain elusive and our desires remain unfulfilled.  Why is that?
It seems that the human experience is one marked by a sense of alienation.  This is not a material alienation, like the one espoused in Marxism which makes the human problem about the alienation of the worker from the means of production.  Nor is it merely a social alienation, marked by the rise of individualism and the decline of community life.  Rather it is an existential alienation – we inhabit this world but feel shut out from some deeper, fuller reality.  Our artists, poets and song writers are often the ones who give voice to this sense of alienation.  Not long ago I heard on the radio the Kaiser Chiefs singing: “There’s a hole in my soul, that a galaxy could fit through…”.  In their lyrics I could hear the echoes of Blaise Pascal reflecting centuries ago: “There is a God-shaped vacuum in the heart of each man which cannot be satisfied by any created thing but only by God the Creator”  (In his work, “Pensées”).
I’m intrigued that Philip Pullman also feels this alienation.  In the previous article in this series we considered his significant spiritual experience in 1969 when he felt a sudden sense of connection to the world – everything and everyone around him was suffused with a new sense of meaning.  That probably prompted him to write in his short story “Lyra’s Oxford” (which fills the gap between His Dark Materials and The Book of Dust): “Everything has a meaning; if only we could read it”.
Pullman was even more candid about his sense of alienation and quest for finding meaningful connection in this interview:

“The kingdom of heaven promised us certain things: it promised us happiness and a sense of purpose and a sense of having a place in the universe, of having a role and a destiny that were noble and splendid; and so we were connected to things. We were not alienated. But now that, for me anyway, the King is dead, I find that I still need these things that heaven promised, and I’m not willing to live without them.”

Earlier in this series we have reflected on how Pullman is (consciously or unconsciously) the anti-C.S. Lewis storyteller.  However, when it comes to this experience of alienation Pullman and Lewis are fellow travellers – although in different directions.  Lewis was not just a great intellectual apologist, but a romantic artist.  Both of those streams meet in his Argument From Desire, which I believe is one of his most important contributions for our work of apologetics today.
Let’s survey some of what Lewis wrote about this existential sense of alienation and his argument from desire.
In his famous sermon “The Weight of Glory”, Lewis articulated the haunting experience of alienation in this way:

“At present we are on the outside of the world, the wrong side of the door. We discern the freshness and purity of morning, but they do not make us fresh and pure. We cannot mingle with the splendours we see. But all the leaves of the New Testament are rustling with the rumour that it will not always be so. Some day, God willing, we shall get in.”

 Earlier in the sermon he reflected on some dead ends in the quest for something to fulfil these longings and desires

“The books or the music in which we thought the beauty was located will betray us if we trust to them; it was not in them, it only came through them, and what came through them was longing. These things—the beauty, the memory of our own past—are good images of what we really desire; but if they are mistaken for the thing itself they turn into dumb idols, breaking the hearts of their worshipers. For they are not the thing itself; they are only the scent of a flower we have not found, the echo of a tune we have not heard, news from a country we have never yet visited…”

In the preface to his first novel “The Pilgrim’s Regress”, Lewis gave some extended reflections on the elusive nature of beauty and desire:

“There is a peculiar mystery about the object of this Desire… Thus if it comes to a child while he is looking at a far off hillside he at once thinks ‘if only I were there’; if it comes when he is remembering some event in the past, he thinks ‘if only I could go back to those days’. If it comes (a little later) while he is reading a ‘romantic’ tale or poem of ‘perilous seas and faerie lands forlorn’, he thinks he is wishing that such places really existed and that he could reach them. … Every one of these supposed objects for the Desire is inadequate to it. An easy experiment will show that by going to the far hillside you will get either nothing, or else a recurrence of the same desire which sent you thither. A rather more difficult, but still possible, study of your own memories, will prove that by returning to the past you could not find, as a possession, that ecstasy which some sudden reminder of the past now moves you to desire. Those remembered moments were either quite commonplace at the time (and owe all their enchantment to memory) or else were themselves moments of desiring”

The story is about the journey of a man (retracing Lewis’ rational and romantic journey to faith) searching for the Island of Desire, only to discover it is merely a reflection of the reality of Heaven.
Then in his final novel “Til We Have Faces”, Lewis put into the mouth of story’s heroine these words, which express the story of his own life:

“The sweetest thing in all my life has been the longing — to reach the Mountain, to find the place where all the beauty came from — my country, the place where I ought to have been born.

The story retells the myth of Cupid and Psyche, literally a story about the ecstatic union of the God of Love and the Soul of Man!
Finally, and perhaps most memorably, Lewis articulated the Argument From Desire in “Mere Christianity”:

“Creatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exists. A baby feels hunger: well, there is such a thing as food. A duckling wants to swim: well, there is such a thing as water. Men feel sexual desire: well, there is such a thing as sex. If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world. If none of my earthly pleasures satisfy it, that does not prove that the universe is a fraud. Probably earthly pleasures were never meant to satisfy it, but only to arouse it, to suggest the real thing. If that is so, I must take care, on the one hand, never to despise, or be unthankful for, these earthly blessings, and on the other, never to mistake them for the something else of which they are only a kind of copy, or echo, or mirage. I must keep alive in myself the desire for my true country, which I shall not find until after death; I must never let it get snowed under or turned aside; I must make it the main object of life to press on to that other country and to help others do the same.”

I love how Lewis articulates the deepest cries of the human heart and helps us to see that they are not merely natural instincts, but a spiritual homing beacon for God our Creator.
The Bible tells us that the human race is truly suffering from alienation.  We suffer alienation from God our Creator, alienation within ourselves (the gulf between our ideals and our actual selves), alienation from others around us (which identity politics is only making worse today), and alienation from creation (which no amount of environmental policy can overcome).  The book of Romans tells us the root of this alienation:

“1:18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened… 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshipped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.”

However, the gospel announces that God has not left us alone in this state of alienation.  Just as the problem was caused by an exchange (our choosing the Creation over the Creator, the Gift over the Giver), so also the solution involved a great exchange: Jesus bearing the alienation and condemnation our sin deserves, so instead we might enjoy reconciliation with God and fullness of life in union with Him.  Having the gulf of alienation bridged by the Cross of Jesus, the Christian can now sing: “This is my Father’s world, and to my listening ears, all nature sings and round me rings, the music of the spheres … This is my Father’s world, He shines in all that’s fair, in the rustling grass, I hear Him pass; He speaks to me everywhere”
That is why the gospel of Jesus – the King of Heaven – is the better story, than the Republic of Heaven that Pullman’s story is all about!
To reach people who are sensitive to this sense of alienation I don’t think we need more arguments, but instead we need more artists who can speak to these existential and aesthetic longings in the human soul – and like Lewis show that beauty is a signpost that points to the Beautiful One!

David Nixon is a pastor who lives in Edinburgh with his wife and two small children.
This article is final part of a series, the previous articles are;
Part One: Why I’ll be watching ‘His Dark Materials’ and so should you.
Part Two: Philip Pullman and the power of stories.
Part Three: Pullman on God and The Church
Part Four: Pullman Dust and the signals of transcendence