Podcast: Answering the Best Objections to the Resurrection (Timothy Paul Jones)

This text is a part of the The Crossway Podcast sequence.

Proof for the Resurrection and Solutions to Widespread Objections

On this episode, Timothy Paul Jones discusses the historic eyewitness proof for Jesus’s resurrection, the main points that distinguish it from different spiritual myths, and the textual reliability of the written accounts highlighting why these sources may be trusted at this time.

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube | RSS

Subjects Addressed in This Interview:

Matt Tully
Timothy, thanks a lot for becoming a member of me at this time on The Crossway Podcast.

Timothy Paul Jones
It’s nice to be with you.

Matt Tully
At this time I need to pose various questions or objections that skeptics—individuals who aren’t Christians—may need associated to the resurrection, this core doctrine of our religion. One thing that, as Paul says, our religion would disintegrate if it weren’t for the resurrection. I believe it might be useful not simply for individuals who are having apologetic conversations with unbelievers, as many people are, attempting to elucidate and reply objections that they may have, however I ponder if there may even be some Christians listening who, in the event that they’re sincere with themselves, they may hear a few of these objections and assume, I don’t really know what I take into consideration that. I don’t understand how I’d reply that. That truly makes me a bit bit nervous in terms of the resurrection. So I ponder if we are able to play-act this a bit bit. How does that sound?

Timothy Paul Jones
That sounds nice.

Matt Tully
First query for you’d be, Isn’t it doable that the resurrection accounts that we learn within the Bible had been simply legends or myths that Jesus’s followers developed after his loss of life? They usually really are fairly much like a number of the different myths of the traditional world, the place there was this dying and rising once more type of god. I consider the parable of Osiris or Attis. Is the story of Jesus actually any totally different from these different tales that every one Christians would say, “Oh, that’s not true. That’s only a fantasy”?

Timothy Paul Jones
Properly, that’s an necessary query to boost. And actually, that’s one thing I really actually wrestled with once I was in faculty. I actually went by a tough disaster of religion. And that was one of many issues that to me was the toughest factor to recover from. It actually was. I actually struggled with that. However right here’s what I discovered is that anytime you’ve gotten a legend that’s one thing preexisting, some type of an concept that’s preexisting, you’ve bought to check the resurrection with this and acknowledge there’s way more totally different than there may be comparable. So let’s take into consideration that complete dying-rising-god kind of factor that occurs proper there.

Matt Tully
As a result of there may be precedent for that.

Timothy Paul Jones
Sure, there are. There’s actually precedent for this dying-rising-god. It’s an actual factor on the market. You could find this sample particularly locations in sure cultures earlier to the time of Jesus. However right here’s one of many key issues that’s totally different: these are all the time agricultural dying and rising. It’s one thing that occurs on a yearly foundation.

Matt Tully
The identical god is dying repeatedly.

Timothy Paul Jones
And rising once more again and again and over. So there’s this tie to the seasons, a tie to the agricultural cycle, and a repetitive nature of it. The opposite factor that you simply by no means see is a bodily resurrection in these. It’s all the time a metaphorical or, at most, a non secular resurrection. In order that’s why, for instance, it’s so essential when you’ve gotten within the New Testomony Gospels Jesus is described in starkly bodily phrases. Sure, he has a non secular physique that may cross by partitions and all of that, however it’s also a bodily physique. He eats fish. He cooks fish. He’s on the seaside there, calling his disciples out within the boat. All these items are occurring. It’s distinctly bodily, and it’s acknowledged that it’s as soon as and for all. And if you take a look at that, there finally ends up being extra distinction between Jesus and these dying-rising-gods than there may be similarity. However I’d additionally add this: I’m really not towards any individual seeing a connection between these. As a result of the reality is that I believe with all of those dying-and-rising-god myths, what we see in these is that they’re a precedent for this within the sense that everyone knows we want new life and resurrection. We all know we want a savior who does this. And so the pagans do that in one of the simplest ways they understand how, by tying it to the seasons. They do it one of the simplest ways they understand how, by tying it to their fields and their fertility and all of these issues like that. They do it one of the simplest ways they understand how. However what we’ve got in look within the pagans, we’ve got in its essence, in its reality, in its actuality in Jesus. And so all that they’re doing with their dying-rising-gods—sure, there was a precedent for that—it’s fulfilled bodily and as soon as for all in Jesus. It’s totally different—distinctly totally different—and but I will even acknowledge the similarity and say that the similarity really builds up a case for the truthfulness of the resurrection.

Matt Tully
It’s fascinating your remark about the way in which it’s tied to the seasons and tied to the cyclical nature of vegetation and crops that we’re used to. And I’ve heard different folks point out the dynamic with vegetation and the foundational significance of those seasons for an agricultural tradition like historical Israel, that even the way in which that God designed the world to perform naturally foreshadows, in a way, the central significance of loss of life and resurrection.

Timothy Paul Jones
Sure, you see that, particularly in Augustine. Augustine sees this actually clearly. I can consider a sermon he preached within the winter of 411, and Augustine hated winter. He hated it with a ardour.

Matt Tully
The entire folks within the northern United States can go learn some Augustine in the event that they really feel unhappy.

Timothy Paul Jones
Precisely. He hated winter. On this sermon—it was within the winter, transferring in the direction of spring of 411—and he was speaking about how terrible winter was and issues like this. However right here’s what he does in that sermon that’s so fascinating as he’s approaching Easter right now: he talks about how God created the world to start with with the loss of life and resurrection already in thoughts. You see, typically we expect that Jesus died and was resurrected and, “Oh! Isn’t this as a candy analogy that we’ve got Winter and Spring? It makes a pleasant analogy.” Augustine’s like, “No, no, no, no, no. God created the world to start with with seasons as a result of he already had Jesus in thoughts.” So he says creation itself testifies to the resurrection, as a result of God created the world already enthusiastic about the loss of life and the resurrection of Jesus. And I believe that’s simply lovely.

Matt Tully
God has embedded these patterns which are hints of what’s to return in Jesus.

Timothy Paul Jones
Sure, precisely.

Matt Tully
One other query: Given the Gospel accounts had been written many years after Jesus’s loss of life and supposed resurrection, how can we belief that these had been precisely reported historic occasions? Generally we may be stunned to study—and I do know that was my state of affairs, the place I didn’t notice till perhaps faculty that these Gospel accounts had been written actually many years after the occasions that they described. I believed they had been occurring and being recorded by disciples in actual time. And that was a bit bit shaking to me. It was a bit bit like, “Wow,. If I requested any individual to inform me about one thing that occurred thirty years in the past or extra, I won’t really feel as assured of their recollection.”

Timothy Paul Jones
I believe it’s an necessary factor, and it’s one of many pushbacks you get from folks like Bart Ehrman and folks like that which are usually skeptical in regards to the truthfulness of the New Testomony Gospels. And I need to say first that this notion that one thing is just not dependable after many years is one thing that’s distinct and distinctive to what we’ve got publish the creation of the printing press within the fifteenth century. So after the printing press, from that point to now, we’re getting issues from spoken actuality to print way more rapidly. It’s simply gotten faster and faster ever because the mid fifteenth century. With the invention of the printing press to now, it has gotten faster and faster and faster from spoken to printed. And only for us to acknowledge that wasn’t the case for many of human historical past. First off, to acknowledge {that a} span, which we do have within the Gospels, of three to 6 many years after the occasions really occurred, that’s really not that totally different from histories of the Caesars or something like that. So first off, we must always acknowledge that a few of our hesitance to simply accept that’s grounded in our personal historic situatedness and the place we’re in historical past. For the folks within the first, second, third, and fourth centuries and later, that will not have appeared almost as atypical because it does for us, who, if one thing miraculous had been to occur on this room proper now, it could be on social media inside just a few hours. And so it’s necessary for us to acknowledge that. However even with that acknowledged, it’s true that there’s a hole, and that hole ought to at the very least concern us, or at the very least we must always have a solution for that exact hole. However I need to level out just a few issues that truly assist the truthfulness of the New Testomony Gospels over that point. Right here’s one actually necessary factor to consider; it’s that the New Testomony Gospels—what’s in them—by no means turns into oral custom. I need to make a distinction proper right here that’s fairly necessary in sociology—on a sociological evaluation of narratives. Oral histories is what you get when the eyewitnesses are nonetheless alive. Oral traditions are what you get when the eyewitnesses die out. Right here’s the factor with the Gospels: they’re all written down whereas eyewitnesses are nonetheless alive. However not solely that, the eyewitnesses are literally circulating within the church buildings. We get that simply from offhand feedback of Paul who speaks about Peter, who says Peter and his spouse are they’re touring round and a number of the different apostles are touring round within the church buildings. There’s this clear notion that the apostles are touring round—individuals who had been the eyewitnesses had been touring round. What occurs in that’s that the very individuals who really originated a few of these tales, the people who find themselves eyewitnesses, they’re exhibiting up within the church buildings the place the tales are being instructed. Which means the story can’t get too removed from the unique actuality. So one of many analogies that’s typically used—in some methods, it’s a really poor analogy—however an analogy that’s typically used is the phone sport. You will have any individual inform any individual a narrative, after which that particular person tells the subsequent particular person, after which the subsequent particular person, after which one after the other all the way in which across the circle, secretly to every one. They usually go all the way in which across the circle. Then by the tip it’s garbled, and all people laughs and says, “Oh, ha, ha. That is what the unique story was in that.” Now, once I was in elementary college, I hated that sport. I’d all the time sabotage that sport half method by.

Matt Tully
Yeah, there’s all the time somebody in there who desires to throw in a bit little bit of a curveball.

Timothy Paul Jones
I used to be that child. That was me. That was me each single time on that. However one of many issues I need to say when any individual makes use of that’s, okay, I’ll really grant you that. I’ll grant you the phone sport. And right here’s what I imply by that. The rationale the phone sport works is exactly as a result of the one who began the story to start with remains to be there on the finish. It really works for that cause.

Matt Tully
As a result of he can verify or deny.

Timothy Paul Jones
Precisely. The one that began the story remains to be there. And so as a result of they’re nonetheless there, they’ll say, “Okay, this was the unique story that was instructed.” In the very same method, within the early church when the Gospels had been being written, the individuals who had been eyewitnesses had been nonetheless current and circulating. And so the reality might be checked towards that. I believe there’s one different little factor so as to add to that, and that’s when it comes to the resurrection particularly—the resurrection story—it doesn’t emerge thirty years later. That’s necessary for us to acknowledge. There’s a distinction between, sure, the New Testomony Gospels, as biographies and as a bias style of literature that emerges describing Jesus, sure, that emerges thirty to sixty years after the resurrection. However it’s very clear that we’ve got a longtime custom in regards to the resurrection, which Paul data in some degree in 1 Corinthians 15:3–7. That’s in circulation very early. Paul says that he “acquired it.” And if we take a look at the almost definitely instances and locations for him to have acquired it, it’s inside just some years of the loss of life, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. And if all that we had—I need us to consider it this manner—if all that we had was simply 1 Corinthians 15:3–7—if that’s all we had—do you notice we even have all we have to be assured that Jesus is any individual we must belief, as a result of it says that he died, that he was buried. It’s very clear: thávontai: he was buried. “He was buried, and he was raised on the third day, in accordance with the Scriptures.” It’s an affirmation of the Previous Testomony. It says he died on our behalf. He died for us—hyper. There’s substitutionary atonement proper there. And it was carried out in accordance with the Scripture’s affirmation of the Previous Testomony. He was buried, he was raised on the third day. Now we have every part that we have to say we must belief Jesus.

Matt Tully
The define is true there.

Timothy Paul Jones
It’s all there. Now, reward God, we’ve got greater than that. But when we had solely that and if solely that had been true, there’s nonetheless each cause to belief, to imagine, to observe Jesus.

Matt Tully
A associated query or concern to this complete subject of trusting what was written down many years afterwards is simply the difficulty of eyewitnesses. Usually Christians will level to the very fact that there have been eyewitnesses. Individuals noticed Jesus after his resurrection. He appeared to all these folks, as recorded within the Gospels. And but we even have, in our modern-day, we acknowledge the unreliability of eyewitness testimony. And we’ve really encoded and tried to mitigate towards that in our court docket system in how we take into consideration eyewitness testimony and the way we stress check it and permit it to be cross-examined and the way we require a number of eyewitnesses, at instances, to verify one thing as true. How do you reply to that? There might have been all types of explanation why folks may need genuinely thought they noticed Jesus they usually encountered Jesus after the very fact, however perhaps they had been simply confused.

Timothy Paul Jones
It’s an necessary level for us to boost. It truly is. And it’s one which we must always take critically, as a result of it’s true that eyewitness testimony is just not one hundred pc dependable. Let’s acknowledge that. We all know that. If in case you have kids, you realize that your kids can inform you vastly totally different tales about the identical factor. And typically a few of them are mendacity. Generally a few of them are incorrect. However they may inform you vastly totally different tales.

Matt Tully
I learn this text about 9/11 a few decade after the September eleventh assaults within the US. They interviewed folks proper after the assaults, after which they interviewed them ten years later, they usually documented all of those examples of various folks—lots of the folks—contradicting themselves—what they’d mentioned they noticed proper after the assaults versus what they remembered seeing ten years later. And so it simply raises that specter of how can we even know folks won’t even deliberately be deceptive folks?

Timothy Paul Jones
I believe after we get to the resurrection, right here’s the primary and most necessary factor about this, particularly to do with the resurrection. Individuals neglect particulars they usually get combined up on an entire lot of particulars. However they are going to bear in mind sure key moments and occasions. So within the first a part of this, we’re speaking about simply the resurrection of Jesus. We’re not speaking in regards to the teachings of Jesus and a few issues like that but, however we’re simply speaking in regards to the resurrection. That’s the kind of factor that typically folks speak of a gist reminiscence, that there’s sure issues that folks might not say it the very same method, however they bear in mind sure explicit occasions that all of them agree on. And let’s consider the analogy of 9/11. They could get a whole lot of issues incorrect, even perhaps the order wherein the planes tragically struck the buildings. They may even get issues like that flawed. However that elementary, most necessary central reminiscence, that these planes struck these buildings and these buildings collapsed on account of that, that’s one thing that everybody remembers.

Matt Tully
Everybody agrees on.

Timothy Paul Jones
Everybody agrees on that. So if we are able to take into consideration the resurrection, that’s that large occasion that everyone agreed on. Resurrection on the third day—each single one in every of these accounts agrees on that. However not solely that, simply as a aspect notice, there are additionally different issues that each single one in every of them agree on. Aside from 1 Corinthians 15, each account provides Mary Magdalene as the primary witness on the empty tomb. There are specific different issues which are held in widespread by each single one of many witnesses. And so as soon as once more, even when that’s all we had—now, reward God, we’ve got greater than that, and I imagine in way over that. I’m not saying that that’s all we must always imagine. But when that was all that’s true, if all that’s true is resurrection on the third day, Mary Magdalene is first witness, Jesus really died, he was buried, he was raised, and Mary Magdalene noticed him alive, after which he appeared to a number of folks afterwards—if that’s all we had, that is sufficient to belief that Jesus was any individual we belief and observe. And that’s what’s necessary for us to acknowledge. Now, only for a second we are able to transfer a bit bit into, and I do know that’s not the primary subject we’re speaking about, however I do additionally imagine that, when it comes to the remainder of the Gospels, that we even have the very fact that there have been a number of people who had been, lets say, checking this. And I don’t imply actually checking over what was written and every part like that, however as these tales are instructed and handed on, they’re tales which there have been individuals who had been eyewitnesses who had been correcting, redirecting reminiscences. And one different factor we must always add in that is the notion of a precise word-for-word citation is a really trendy thought. They simply didn’t assume in these phrases. They didn’t assume when it comes to a precise word-for-word citation.

Matt Tully
That wasn’t that necessary to them.

Timothy Paul Jones
Sure, it simply merely wasn’t the way in which they considered issues in that point interval. What was necessary in writing a biography and what was necessary in writing a textual content that’s traditionally correct is one thing that’s correct to the intent of the speaker. And we even discover that in a number of the historiographical works within the first, second, and third century, that that’s how they’re pondering when it comes to. And so in some methods, it’s very like the entire thing to do with issues going rapidly to press and being written down rapidly. Generally it’s simple to learn our trendy cultural biases again into that point interval and have an expectation that they themselves didn’t have about exactitude when it comes to reporting issues.

Matt Tully
We see that even the chronology of the Gospels, the place there are particular occasions which are positioned somewhere else, and a part of that’s simply distinction in what it meant to do historical past again then in comparison with at this time.

Timothy Paul Jones
Precisely. So they’d put issues in an order to satisfy a specific aim that they’d for what they needed to speak. And that is correct. It’s truthful. Matthew is attempting to speak one thing considerably totally different about Jesus than Luke. These two issues are usually not in contradiction. However Luke is arranging his narrative to make a set of factors which are considerably totally different than what Matthew is doing. Not in contradiction; there isn’t any contradiction between them. However they’re doing various things, and that’s okay. And the identical factor with Mark and with John. They’re every doing one thing considerably totally different. It’s why it’s lovely and necessary that God, by his Spirit, has impressed 4 Gospels. As a result of we get this full-orbed image of who Jesus really was.

Matt Tully
Some skeptics at this time, and positively even the skeptic Jewish leaders of Jesus’s personal day after his loss of life and resurrection, they’ll counsel that Jesus’s disciples stole his physique. Somebody stole his physique. That turned the inspiration for this resurrection fantasy that then unfold round, the place lots of Jesus’s followers who undoubtedly and sincerely believed that he had raised from the lifeless as a result of his physique was gone, however really, it was simply stolen by a few of his followers. How would you reply to that? How can we all know that that isn’t really what occurred?

Timothy Paul Jones
I believe there are two various things that we are able to say in response to that which are useful and which are correct to the historical past. A kind of is that Christianity clearly turns into an issue for the spiritual management in Jerusalem in a short time. If the disciples had stolen the physique, or if any individual else had stolen the physique, I believe I’d have been in search of that physique, seeing if I might find that physique.

Matt Tully
Attempt to discover it after which say, “Nope. He’s proper right here.”

Timothy Paul Jones
As a result of that will squelch the entire thing instantly. And so I believe that’s not a lot one thing for which we’re drawing explicit historic knowledge. We’re merely saying that is one thing that they’d have tried to do. And hiding a physique, there’s quite a bit concerned. Getting a physique out, hiding it with out anyone seeing it—all these issues like that. It’s a bit absurd when you concentrate on it.

Matt Tully
And that’s why they posted guards, proper? They understood from the get-go that this was a possible risk to what they’d carried out, and they also had been attempting to mitigate towards it.

Timothy Paul Jones
Precisely. And the second factor that I believe is necessary for us to acknowledge—and this one is much extra necessary and is one which we aren’t merely making an statement about typical human habits; we even have proof for this one, precise historic proof. And it’s merely the truth that if the disciples had stolen the physique—so however, if we are saying if any individual else had stolen the physique, they’re going to seek out that physique—but when the disciples had stolen the physique, which appears extra probably that the disciples may need carried out that, you’ve gotten at the very least three disciples who died for the religion that they had been professing within the risen Lord Jesus. Now, there have been most likely greater than that, however I’m speaking in regards to the ones that we’ve got such robust historic proof for that it’s undoubtable. Peter, James the brother of Jesus, and James the apostle. These three died for his or her religion within the risen Jesus. And as I mentioned, this isn’t simply proof contained in the New Testomony; that is proof exterior the New Testomony. And certainly, some proof from individuals who weren’t even Christians, we’ve got proof for this. So for these three, there isn’t any affordable solution to deny that they died for his or her religion in Jesus Christ. And right here’s the factor: at the very least one in every of them (most likely all of them), if the disciples stole the physique, they had been in on it, and also you’ve bought folks dying for one thing that they knew was a hoax and one thing for which they weren’t getting something optimistic out of it. It’s not like that by creating this new faith they had been getting some type of wealth or energy or anything. They’re gaining nothing by this new faith. They’re shedding every part. They go all the way in which to loss of life testifying. We all know that they go to loss of life from different sources exterior the New Testomony, and but they don’t again down from it. They don’t again down. They go all the way in which to the purpose of loss of life. Individuals will die for lies in historical past. Hundreds of thousands of individuals have died for lies. However folks don’t die for what they know is a lie. Even when perhaps any individual would, you don’t have three folks all dying for one thing they know was a lie. So in the event that they went to that time, they honestly believed Jesus was resurrected. They really believed it. Now, whether or not they had been proper, whether or not they had been flawed, clearly, I imagine the proof factors to them being proper. However no matter it was, they actually did imagine it.

Matt Tully
As a result of that was one other query I had. Generally Christians will argue that as a result of these folks had been keen to die and undergo for the sake of this Messiah that they believed in, that demonstrates that it should have been true. Once more, we take a look at historical past and we take a look at the world at this time even and we see there are lots of people who’re keen to provide their lives and sacrifice their lives for one thing that we as Christians would say is full falsehood. Once more, how do you reply to that concept that merely the truth that they had been keen to provide their lives demonstrates that it was true?

Timothy Paul Jones
I believe it’s necessary for us as Christians to answer that in a way more restricted sense than we typically do. Martyrdom itself doesn’t exhibit reality. Simply martyrdom alone doesn’t exhibit reality. It’s martyrdom of any individual who would have identified whether or not or not it was true or false. That’s what we’re speaking about right here. And I believe it’s necessary for us to restrict our argument to that, as a result of in any other case we develop into rightly inclined to any individual saying, “Look. This particular person died for this, this particular person died for this. Does that imply all these issues had been true?” No, it doesn’t imply all these issues are true, however these folks sincerely believed it was true. And so we convey two issues collectively: individuals who would have identified if it was true and individuals who died for it being true; individuals who believed it was true and would have identified in another way. That’s what we’ve got to search for on the level that these two issues intersect. And Peter, James the brother of Jesus, and James the apostle, for these three it intersects. Now we have good proof that they died for his or her religion. We even have good proof they’d have identified if it was false. And in order that intersection is that time at which we must always construct our argument.

Matt Tully
Perhaps as a closing query, in philosophy there’s this notion of Occam’s razor. It’s the concept that basically says the only rationalization is often the very best one, often the appropriate one, so we begin there. We see that demonstrated and we see the validity of that normal precept in how we take into consideration the world in every single place. So in terms of the resurrection, isn’t the only rationalization the one which requires the least leaping by hoops? To say that one thing else occurred to Jesus reasonably than this type of supernatural, miraculous resurrection? It’s one thing we’ve not ever witnessed with our eyes earlier than and we don’t see in on a regular basis life, however we do see conspiracies. We see folks mendacity. We see folks getting confused. Isn’t the only rationalization a type of different theories reasonably than precise resurrection?

Timothy Paul Jones
Properly, I believe there’s two ranges of how we must always have interaction with that exact query. One in every of them is it’s necessary for us to confess—each as Christians or non-Christians—that the reason that appears easiest goes to be pushed, at the very least partly, by the presuppositions we convey to that. And so when you presuppose a universe wherein there isn’t any non secular actuality, yeah, the best and the only rationalization is that it simply didn’t occur.

Matt Tully
And by definition, can’t occur.

Timothy Paul Jones
Precisely. It may possibly’t occur. For those who’re going to presuppose the opportunity of each, of both that it might have been a materialist rationalization or a non secular one or some confluence of each, then I’d contend that the only rationalization is that Jesus was raised from the lifeless. And I say that as a result of if you concentrate on it, you don’t merely have to elucidate there was no physique within the tomb; you need to clarify a whole lot of different issues too. What occurred to the physique? You need to clarify why folks would begin giving their lives and risking their lives in response to this. Why folks would proceed to carry onto this reality, even even supposing they had been being persecuted, after they had been individuals who would have seen it. You need to begin explaining different issues. And so after we apply the regulation of Occam’s razor, which I believe it’s a great factor for us to do, we’ve got to acknowledge we don’t simply have to elucidate the preliminary occasion. We even have to elucidate the issues that got here after the occasion. If you start to have a look at it that method, the reasons that contain hallucinations, hoaxes, all these totally different different prospects, they out of the blue develop into actually, actually difficult. The reason turns into difficult. The opposite one—Jesus rose from the lifeless and folks responded to that by worshiping him, by following him to the purpose of loss of life—that out of the blue turns into a a lot easier one after we take the entire of the proof into consideration. Not simply the preliminary occasion itself of any individual being raised from the lifeless or a physique being gone from the tomb, not simply that, but when we take the entire thing into consideration and acknowledge we additionally must have an evidence that accounts for what occurred within the months and years after that. Then, out of the blue, the Christian rationalization really does develop into a a lot easier rationalization.

Matt Tully
You began off that reply by referencing simply the presuppositions that every one of us convey to any query or any challenge that we’re enthusiastic about. How do you assist somebody who’s coming from a materialist worldview, the place they only virtually categorically assume, Properly, these items can’t occur. Miracles don’t occur. I’ve by no means seen one occur. I’ve by no means identified anybody who mentioned they noticed one occur. It’s the identical cause why I don’t assume that one of many explanations is aliens got here and bought his physique and took him away they usually had been invisible. There are issues which are up to now past our regular expertise that we don’t even entertain them as prospects. How do you assist any individual who’s in that spot to really develop into open to the opportunity of, let’s simply say, the supernatural on the planet?

Timothy Paul Jones
I believe one of many issues I need first for them to see is that they’re being those at that time who’s closed-minded. Usually Christians are the closed-minded, bigoted folks, when it comes to folks’s perceptions. The very fact is we’re being extra open-minded, as a result of we’ve got a multiplicity of various potential explanations for this. We presuppose that. The opposite factor I actually need to do exactly at a extra light, loving, working all the way down to the core of their points is I’m really any individual like that. I’m going to ask them, “When did you begin feeling this manner? When did you begin having this doubt in regards to the non secular realm?” As a result of one thing I discovered again and again is definitely that the one who is doing that, often there’s some level of doubt or damage that we’ve got to get all the way down to with them. And so I’m really not going to start out by flinging proof at them. I don’t assume it’s useful at that time. I’m going to ask them, “When did you begin feeling this manner?”

Matt Tully
What’s the story there?

Timothy Paul Jones
What’s the story of how you bought right here? As a result of I simply have deep, deep confidence in Romans 1, the place Paul says that everyone is aware of that there’s a God. And in the event that they got here to some extent at which they essentially simply disbelieve within the non secular fully, one thing has occurred to steer them away from what their coronary heart is aware of, to attract them away from that. And I need them to inform me that story, and I need to speak about that story, after which I need to transfer towards proof. However lengthy earlier than I get to the proof, I need to discover out what bought you right here, how can I communicate with love and with grace into what bought you there? How can I take care of you in what could also be some extent of deep ache in your life? How can I take care of you and love you in that? And that’s really the very first thing I’m going to do earlier than I ever get to the proof.

Matt Tully
Timothy, that’s such a useful solution to even end up this dialog. We’ve been so centered on proof and arguments, however we are able to typically, as we do apologetics, we are able to lose sight of the truth that we’re speaking to an individual who has a historical past, has emotions, has fears. And oftentimes, the start of apologetics and even the tip of apologetics is partaking with the particular person proper in entrance of us and listening to them. So thanks a lot for taking the time at this time to assist us have a bit extra understanding of how we are able to have interaction with folks on this subject.

Timothy Paul Jones
Thanks. It’s been nice to be with you.

Well-liked Articles in This Collection