Cross Examined

If anything is unchanging, God should be. But our picture of God (all powerful, omniscient, omnipresent) doesn't represent the God you get out from the Old Testament. Back in God's youth, he was a lot weaker than he is now. Consider two examples from the Bible. (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

One of the three doors has a car behind it. You pick one, and the game show host reveals that one of the other two is a goat. Knowing that there's a total of two goats and one car, do you switch? (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

DNA is marvelously complicated, but mere complexity can make us miss the real issues. When we examine DNA and the sloppy way it's put together, the Argument from Design collapses. (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

Teleology says that life shows the hand of a designer; dysteleology says the reverse. Four aspects of DNA—the c-value enigma, pseudogenes, endogenous retroviruses, and atavisms—make a clear case for the latter. (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

How can probability be used to help clarify the God question? A quick (and easy) summary of Bayes' Theorem will provide a useful tool in weighing competing claims. (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

Let's conclude our look at Greg Koukl's analysis of the Problem of Evil. We're on the same page that this is a tough problem for Christianity, but I'm not sure that his resolution is as complete as he thinks. (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.Patheos.com/Blogs/CrossExamined)

Groundhog Day (February 2) is a day when we can celebrate some old wives' tale about groundhogs seeing their shadow, but few people know about the religious foundation of this day. (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

My comments in honor of the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade has gotten a response. It's more supportive than many Christian responses. Let's take a look. (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

A popular fundamentalist Christian wrestles with the Problem of Evil. He's confident that he's got this persistent problem under control. Take a look and see if that optimism is well placed. (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

You don't call yourself an a-unicornist. Or an a-Santaist. Why should people without a god belief call themselves a-theists? (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

"Abortion means the death of a baby!" That's true only if you say that a newborn baby is no different than the single cell that it came from. But this denies a spectrum of personhood that we all acknowledge. (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

How do you describe the relationship between you and Jesus? It's similar to an ordinary person-to-person relationship ... or so goes the popular analogy. Think about it for a moment, however, and this analogy falls apart. (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

A podcaster has pushed back against my recent "Scientist Thinking vs. Lawyer Thinking" post. Let's give him a hearing and see what that does to my argument. (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

The Catholic League's Bill Donohue enjoys getting agitated about this or that perceived insult against his religion, but he's delighted with a new study showing the religious to be more generous. A little research uncovers a different story, however. (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

"God exists" is an easy claim to make, but how likely is it? Consider a series of increasingly unlikely categories of claims to see where the Christian claim fits in. (For the podcast transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

Christians often reshape their view of life's events to fit and bolster their Christian worldview, but give it a little thought. The simple Christian explanation of God's hand at work often leads to a bizarre conclusion. (To find the transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

Sift through Paul's writings, and you get very little of the biography of Jesus. What does this say about how the Jesus story grew over time? (To find the transcript, search for the title at www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined)

Is a scientific consensus inconvenient? Then just handwave a reason to reject it! Though this is a popular response to unwanted scientific conclusions, it is intellectually indefensible.

Consider two kinds of thinking--scientist thinking and lawyer thinking. Each has its place, but we fool ourselves when we use one but pretend that we're using another.

Christopher Hitchens' book observed, "God is Not Great." While we're at it, God doesn't seem particularly good, either. Take a look at the slavery, genocide, and general barbarity the all-loving Creator of the universe apparently approves of, and "good" doesn't seem to apply.