LAST WEEK: WINSOME SOJOURNERS 1 Peter 3:8-12

WINSOME SOJOURNERS 1 Peter 3:8-12 BIG GOAL = Living a winsome life that “wins some” interest in a winsome message.

1 Peter 3: And who will harm you if you are deeply committed to what is good? 14 But even if you should suffer for righteousness, you are blessed. Do not fear what they fear or be disturbed, 15 but honor the Messiah as Lord in your hearts. Always be ready to give a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you. 16 However, do this with gentleness and respect, keeping your conscience clear, so that when you are accused, those who denounce your Christian life will be put to shame. 17 For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be God’s will, than for doing evil.

1 Peter 3: And who will harm you if you are deeply committed to what is good? 14 But even if you should suffer for righteousness, you are blessed. Do not fear what they fear or be disturbed, 15 but honor the Messiah as Lord in your hearts. Always be ready to give a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you. 16 However, do this with gentleness and respect, keeping your conscience clear, so that when you are accused, those who denounce your Christian life will be put to shame. 17 For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be God’s will, than for doing evil.

THE CLUES OF GOD 1 Peter 3:15-16

Let’s get our terms straight…  Hope ≠ wishful thinking  Hope = eager & confident anticipation  Faith ≠ a blind leap into the unknown  “Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.” (Hebrews 11:1 NIV)

Can we prove God’s existence?  Prove = conclude based off of empirical analysis in a laboratory or through some other objective experience (popular definition)  “I’ll believe it when I see it!”  How did you empirically observe that only the things that can be observed are real or valuable?

Why is there something rather than nothing? “We have this very solid conclusion that the universe had an origin, the Big Bang. Fifteen billion years ago, the universe began with an unimaginably bright flash of energy from an infinitesimally small point. That implies that before that, there was nothing. I can’t imagine how nature, in this case the universe, could have created itself. And the very fact that the universe had a beginning implies that someone was able to begin it. And it seems to me that had to be outside of nature.” -Francis Collins in The Language of God

Why is there something rather than nothing? “We have this very solid conclusion that the universe had an origin, the Big Bang. Fifteen billion years ago, the universe began with an unimaginably bright flash of energy from an infinitesimally small point. That implies that before that, there was nothing. I can’t imagine how nature, in this case the universe, could have created itself. And the very fact that the universe had a beginning implies that someone was able to begin it. And it seems to me that had to be outside of nature.” -Francis Collins in The Language of God We intuitively realize that everything in this world has a cause or source.

Why is there something rather than nothing? Objections?  The universe could be eternal (but it is expanding and thus indicates a point of origin)  The universe could have created itself (but why would we have a universe full of contingent entities if its original nature was non-contingent)

Why is there something rather than nothing? Objections?  The universe could be eternal (but it is expanding and thus indicates a point of origin)  The universe could have created itself (but why would we have a universe full of contingent entities if it original nature was non- contingent) BOTH OF THOSE IDEAS REQUIRE MUCH FAITH!!!

Why is the universe, specifically Earth, so suited to life? “When you look from the perspective of a scientist at the universe, it looks as if it knew we were coming. There are 15 constants – the gravitational constant, various constants about the strong and weak nuclear force, etc. – that have precise values. If any one of those constants was off by even one part in a million, or in some cases, by one part in a million million, the universe could not have actually come to the point where we see it. Matter would not have been able to coalesce, there would have been no galaxy, stars, planets, or people.” -Francis Collins

Why is the universe, specifically Earth, so suited to life? Objections?  An embarrassing reality to atheist philosophers and scientists until recently…  Until the multi-verse theory was put forth  There may be trillions of universes out there so it is inevitable that one would eventually produce a situation like ours.

Why is the universe, specifically Earth, so suited to life? Objections?  An embarrassing reality to atheist philosophers and scientists until recently…  Until the multi-verse theory was put forth  There may be trillions of universes out there so it is inevitable that one would eventually produce a situation like ours. “I know it looks suspicious! But what if there is an infinite succession of universes, so that for any possible distribution of poker hands, there is one universe in which this possibility is realized? We just happen to find ourselves in one where I always deal myself four aces without cheating!” -Alvin Plantinga

Why are we so drawn to beauty and art? Objections?  Just because we have these deep longings or feelings, does not mean they point to anything.  But this does not fit with the evolutionary theory that is behind this objection!  “If we find ourselves with a desire that nothing in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that we were made for another world.”(C.S. Lewis)

Why do we trust in our ability to reason? Objections?  Evolutionists maintain that laws of reason make sense to us only because they help us survive, not because they help us discover truth.

Why do we trust in our ability to reason? Objections?  Evolutionists maintain that laws of reason make sense to us only because they help us survive, not because they help us discover truth. “Everything we value – from sugar and sex and money to music and love and religion – we value for reasons. Lying behind, and distinct from, our reasons are evolutionary reasons, free-floating rationales that have been endorsed by natural selection.” - Daniel Dennett in Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon

Why do we trust in our ability to reason? Objections?  Evolutionists maintain that laws of reason make sense to us only because they help us survive, not because they help us discover truth. “Everything we value – from sugar and sex and money to music and love and religion – we value for reasons. Lying behind, and distinct from, our reasons are evolutionary reasons, free-floating rationales that have been endorsed by natural selection.” - Daniel Dennett in Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon If we can’t trust our reasoning abilities to point us to truth about God and meaning-related things, then why on earth would evolutionists be able to trust their reasoning abilities to explain why we shouldn’t trust our reasoning abilities?

Why do we trust in our ability to reason? Objections?  Evolutionists maintain that laws of reason make sense to us only because they help us survive, not because they help us discover truth. “Everything we value – from sugar and sex and money to music and love and religion – we value for reasons. Lying behind, and distinct from, our reasons are evolutionary reasons, free-floating rationales that have been endorsed by natural selection.” - Daniel Dennett in Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon If we can’t trust our reasoning abilities to point us to truth about God and meaning-related things, then why on earth would evolutionists be able to trust their reasoning abilities to explain why we shouldn’t trust our reasoning abilities? It is ABSURD to invoke the power of reason to destroy reason!

Why do we trust in our ability to reason? What do people usually do?  Keep on living inconsistently (trust fully in reason even while seeking to undermine it)  Demote reason & elevate relativity (personal preference reigns)

Why are we moral beings? Objections?  We’re not! We are moral relativists…

Why are we moral beings? Objections?  We’re not! We are moral relativists… “If there is no God, then there is no way to say any one action is ‘moral’ and another ‘immoral’ but only ‘I like this.’ If that is the case, who gets the right to put their subjective, arbitrary moral feelings into law?” - Tim Keller in The Reason for God

Why are we moral beings? Objections?  We’re not! We are moral relativists… “There is not a person in the world that behaves as badly as praying mantises. But wait, you say, there is no right or wrong in nature; right and wrong is a human concept! Precisely! We are moral creatures in an amoral world... Or consider the alternative…it is only human feeling that is freakishly amiss... All right then – it is our emotions that are amiss. We are freaks, the world is fine, and let us all go have lobotomies to restore us to a natural state. We can leave…lobotomized, go back to the creek, and live on its banks as untroubled as any muskrat or reed. You first.” -Annie Dillard in Pilgrim at Tinker Creek

BIG TAKEAWAY??? If a beginning premise (“there is no God”) leads to some unlivable and frightening conclusions (“exterminating Jews and killing children is culturally relative”), then why on earth would you not change your premise?

Ushers please come forward… A Chance to Give to the Cause