Facts about abortion

Introduction

This is a tidied up version of the notes from a talk I gave at an event all about abortion.  It was a really good event with a wide range of views in the room.  It was emotional and at times upsetting, but no-one got cross and everyone seemed to appreciate that we were able to disagree agreeably and reassess what we each thought about this important issue.  I hope you find this helps you in your own thinking too.

Before we get into it, there’s three things I would ask of us as we think about and discuss the issue of abortion:

Firstly, let’s tread lightly when we express our views on this subject.  For many of us, it will be a painful topic.  So let’s be gentle in the way we express opinions that others may find difficult to hear.

Secondly, let’s not preclude anyone from being heard or understood in this discussion purely because of their gender.  That would be sexist.  Let’s acknowledge that people of any gender may well be affected by abortion and have equal rights as human beings to be heard.

Thirdly, let’s appreciate that this issue isn’t one that should necessarily divide Christians from Humanists.  I used to assume that most Humanists would be pro-choice, but I’m realising that many aren’t.  There may well be common ground between many of us on this issue, regardless of our religious views.  I won’t be appealing to God or the Bible in this discussion, so try not to think of me as “Dave the Christian” but simply as “Dave the human being” for this one.  We can talk about God another time!

So, with that said, I want to explore some of the facts about abortion under two headings:

1. DEFINITIONS – What exactly are we talking about?

2. HISTORY – What can we learn from the UK’s journey with abortion so far?


DEFINTIONS – What exactly are we talking about?

3 questions I want to ask here:
What is an abortion?
How does it work?
What words should we use to describe it most accurately?

The NHS website has lots of helpful information about abortion.  It says,

“An abortion is the medical process of ending a pregnancy so it doesn’t result in the birth of a baby”

and,

“The pregnancy is ended either by taking medications or having a minor surgical procedure.”

The NHS website also describes the different methods that are used:

MEDICAL ABORTION

First, there’s the ‘medical abortion’ method.  This is 2 medications, 24-48 hours apart, “to induce a miscarriage”, it tells us.  And…

“…the lining of the womb breaks down, causing bleeding and loss of the pregnancy…”

This method can be used at any stage but most is effective in first 9 weeks.

SURGICAL ABORTION 

Then there’s the ‘surgical abortion’ method and there are 2 kinds:

1. Vacuum/Suction

The NHS website says this method is “used up to 15 weeks…  inserting a tube… and the pregnancy is removed using suction.”

“Takes 5-10 minutes.”

Then there’s the second kind of ‘surgical abortion’ method,

2. Dilation and Evacuation

Again quoting the NHS website, it says this method is “used from around 15 weeks… inserting… forceps through the cervix and into the womb to remove the pregnancy.”

Now that we have a pretty good idea what’s being described by the word ‘abortion’, we should stop to think about terminology.  What words should we use to describe abortion most accurately?

What exactly is being ‘ended’ and ‘removed’ in an abortion?

The phrase the NHS website opts for is “the pregnancy”, but for obvious reasons, I think they’re trying to use the most sensitive language possible. Completely understandable.

Some would want to say “the baby”, but the objection would be that this is too emotive.  So I won’t be using that phrase.

Others would say it’s a “human person” but this is clearly up for debate.  And “personhood” is an entirely sociological term anyway, so its definition is up for grabs, being defined by different people in different ways at different times.

How about “human life”?  Is it accurate to say it’s a human life that’s being ended and removed in an abortion?

Dr. C. Ward Kischer, Professor Emeritus of Human Embryology, University of Arizona School of Medicine says,

“Every human embryologist, worldwide, states that the life of the new individual human being begins at fertilization (conception).”  [Taken from this article.]

And JT Eberl, in his book ‘The Beginning of Personhood’ (page 35) says,

“As far as human ‘life’ per se, it is, for the most part, uncontroversial among the scientific and philosophical community that life begins at the moment when the genetic information contained in the sperm and ovum combine to form a genetically unique cell.”  [Taken from this article]

What does this mean?

It means it is a well-established scientific fact that “human life” begins at conception.

So let’s take another look at the definition of abortion from the NHS website:

“An abortion is the medical process of ending a pregnancy so it doesn’t result in the birth of a baby.”

“The pregnancy is ended either by taking medications or having a minor surgical procedure.”

This is definitely a sensitive way of describing abortion, but I don’t think it’s the most accurate description. 

I think a more accurate definition would be as follows:

An abortion is the medical process of prematurely ending a human life during a pregnancy.

The human life is ended either by taking medications or having a minor surgical procedure.

The phrase “human life” more accurately describes what it is that’s being ended and removed every time an abortion takes place.  The phrase “human life” is not a debatable sociological term like “personhood”, nor is it a phrase based on religious beliefs.  “Human life” is an accurate biological description for what is being ended and removed in an abortion.

So we have this fact: Abortion ends human lives.

So that’s DEFINITIONS.  Now let’s turn to…


HISTORY – What can we learn from the UK’s journey with abortion so far?

3 questions I want to ask here:
When, how and why have abortion laws changed in our country?
Did the changes to the law have the desired effects?
What is the situation today?

It’s worth knowing how a human life develops in its mother’s womb during pregnancy and how this process intersects with the laws we have in the UK today.

Conception: A human life begins.  Height, sex, eye-colour determined
Week 5: There is a heartbeat
Week 6: Brain is formed
Week 8: It can move on its own
Week 9: Hands, feet, toes
Week 12: Complete skeleton
Most abortions take place between 8 and 12 weeks
Week 20: Can hear and recognise voices
Week 24: Can survive on its own if born
24 weeks: Legal limit for abortions
40 weeks: Legal limit if severely disabled

Let’s take a look at how laws have changed in the UK over the years.  This comes from an article by the BBC.

Pre 1803 English Common Law agreed that abortion was a crime after ”quickening” (when it was believed the soul entered the fetus).

1803 English Statute Law made abortion after quickening a crime punishable by death but less serious before that point.

1837 English Law abandoned “quickening” notion and the death penalty for abortion.

1920s Abortion still illegal but a clause was added to make an exception where abortion was “…done in good faith for the purpose only of preserving the life of the mother.”

The BBC article says: “This change officially recognised a little-stressed feature of anti-abortion laws; they were often intended to protect women from a dangerous medical procedure, and not to protect the life of the foetus.”

1938 The R v Bourne case established that the mother’s mental suffering could also be sufficient reason for an abortion to “preserve the life of the mother”, “if” (as the judge said at that time), ”…the probable consequence of the pregnancy will be to make the woman a physical or mental wreck.”

…or if the baby to be born would be quote “seriously handicapped.”

Although it is often said that the 1967 Abortion Act gave women in Britain the right to have an abortion, it actually didn't do that - abortion remained a crime under the earlier law, and the 1967 Act provided a defence for those who had carried out an abortion under certain conditions.

That was the intention.

But can you see the loophole in this change to the law???

The problem is: ANY abortion can be justified on these grounds.

When does having a baby NOT pose significant risk of harm to a woman’s mental health???

And when is that risk less than a procedure which today can take less than 10 minutes?

Isn’t having kids is ALWAYS riskier on the mum’s mental health than having an abortion?

I adore my kids, but they drive us nuts as well!!

The 1967 Abortion Act had failed to do what it set out to do.  Rather than limit abortion to exceptional circumstances, it actually allowed it to become more common…

According to The Johnston Archive, in 1991 the total number of abortions carried out legally in the UK was 117,567.  That’s 322 every day.

And in 1991, clarifications were made so that abortions could be justified for 7 different reasons.  Today, 2 doctors have to name at least one of these 7 as the reason or reasons to justify the abortion in every case. 

The unintended (or perhaps intended) wide open loophole is still there!  Can you spot it? 

Here are the 7 reasons: 

A. The continuance of the pregnancy would involve greater risk to the life of the pregnant woman than if it were terminated.

B. To prevent “grave permanent injury” to the mother’s physical or mental health.

C. The pregnancy has not exceeded its 24th week and the risk to the mother’s physical or mental health by continuing the pregnancy is greater than terminating it.

D. The pregnancy has not exceeded its 24th week and the risk to the mother’s existing children’s physical or mental health by continuing the pregnancy is greater than terminating it.

E. There is a substantial risk that if the child were born, it would be “seriously handicapped”.

F. To save the life of the mother.

G. The termination is NECESSARY to prevent “grave permanent injury” to the mother’s physical or mental health.

Which one of these 7 reasons do you think is used most often when abortions are carried out today in the UK?

It shouldn’t surprise us that it’s C. 

Why?  Because the risk on the mother’s mental health of continuing the pregnancy is ALWAYS greater than the risk of having a simple medical procedure to terminate it. 

Bringing a new human life into the world is ALWAYS riskier than not doing that. 

And so the consequence of the 1967 Abortion Act continues to this day. 

Reason C allows women in the UK to have an abortion for ANY and EVERY reason.

Reason C accounts for the vast majority of abortions carried out in the UK and it’s rising still.

Back in 1991, reason C accounted for 82% of the abortions carried out in the UK that year.

By 2011 it was 98%!!!

Today, nearly ALL abortions are carried out for this reason because ANY abortion can be justified under this reason.  It’s a loophole.  The only question is whether or not it was an intentional loophole or a genuine legal blind spot.  We can’t know either way.

What we do know is that abortion for convenience is common in the UK.  We can’t say it accounts for the 98% of abortions that happen for reason C, but we can surely say it happens on a daily basis.

The NHS website tells us that 1 in 3 women in the UK will have an abortion during their lifetime.

And we know that today, 190,000 abortions happen every year in the UK.  That’s 520 every day.  And this is a 60% increase since 2001.

Summary

So to sum up what we’ve learned from exploring accurate definitions and the UK’s legal history when it comes to abortion, we need to acknowledge the following 3 facts:

1. Abortion ends human lives.
2. 520 abortions happen in the UK every day.
3. Abortion for convenience is common.

There are many other things to consider on this topic, but I think these 3 obviously relevant facts should never be overlooked. 

My best hope for you as you read this, is that you will see abortion for what it truly is: the premature ending of a human life.

If you’re someone affected by abortion, I hope you will have everything you need following that life-changing decision.

If you're currently facing this difficult choice, I hope you have all the most accurate and relevant information you need, even if some of it is hard to hear.

Let’s make good choices!

Moses returns to Egypt - Exodus 4:18-31

This next part of the story has some stuff that makes sense if we've been following along... er, and one bit that will seem a bit weird, unless you know about some stuff back in Genesis.

The main point here?  It's 2 things:
1. God has a plan and Moses is learning to trust and follow it.
2. And the plan is really good news for the Israelite slaves!

Stop and read Exodus 4:18-31

So we've seen that Moses is a reluctant leader but that God is insistent that he should be part of his plan to rescue the Israelite nation from slavery to Pharaoh in Egypt.

Moses continues to show a lack of faith when he says to his father-in-law Jethro, that the reason he's returning to Egypt is to see if any of the Israelites there are "still alive"!  He's still not completely trusting in God's plans and promises.

He packs up and sets off, remembering his staff, which is now referred to as "the staff of God" because of how it will be used to show God's power with Moses.

God reminds Moses of all that he is do and all that is going to happen in Egypt.  God will harden Pharaoh's heart (more on this later) and it will ultimately end in the freedom of God's "firstborn son" (the nation of Israel - the descendants of Abraham) and in the deaths of many firstborn sons of Egyptian families because of Pharaoh's hard heart (he hardens his own heart too but more on this later).

Then we've got this weird bit on the way back to Egypt where God is about to kill Moses because his son hasn't been circumcised and Zipporah, his wife takes care of it for him. 

What's the big deal?  And why now? 

Well, the big deal is found back in Genesis 17 - the covenant of circumcision.  It was a deal God made with Abraham (the father of the nation of Israel).  God promised Abraham that he would have not only a son but many sons and many descendants that would become a great nation of people: Israel!  And as a sign of this miraculous work of God to multiply this family and bless the whole world through it, every male would be circumcised.  It seems like a strange kind of sign but every time an Israelite bloke looked down, he would be reminded that God keeps his promises!  Moses had apparently neglected to circumcise his son and it needed doing in order to honor God's covenant deal with Abraham. 

And why now?  Because now, more than ever, Moses needed to remember that God keeps his promises.  And he needed to get this sign sorted on the way to Egypt because he was going to be representing the Israelite nation, and so he'd better make sure he's living the life of an Israelite man, banking on the promises of God and teaching his kids to do the same!

As promised, God sends Aaron to link up with Moses to go to Egypt.  He's on board.

And then we have this encouraging moment where they arrive in Egypt and the Israelites believe Moses has been sent by God to free them from slavery.  After 400 years of it, they must have been starting to wonder when or whether God would keep his promises to them.  When they realise that God has seen their suffering and still cares about them and still has plans for them, they worship him!

So Moses is learning more and more to trust and follow the plans and promises of God for himself, his family and for those he would lead.  There's a lesson for us as Christians!!  But I for one am glad that today it doesn't require the use of a flint knife!

And God's plan is really good news for the Israelite slaves.  And today, God's plan is really good news for those in slavery to sin who need the rescue Jesus offers.  He sees our suffering.  He cares.  He has plans.  He wants to set his people free!!

Back to Exodus blog

God's anger and hatred (Romans 1:18-32)

In this part of Paul's letter to the Christians in Rome, before he can explain what's so good about the good news of Jesus, he explains what's so BAD about people.

The Bible says 'God is love' and this is true but love is more than just an emotion - it is about action too.  In fact, God's emotions are wide-ranging and include anger and hatred when the situation and his goodness warrants it.  As CS Lewis said, 'anger is the fluid love bleeds when you cut it'...

Stop and read Romans 1:18-32

The first thing Paul says God gets angry about is the suppression of truth, especially the truth about himself.  Of course, Christians are just as capable of suppressing truth and telling lies about God as anyone else is, but Paul is talking about those who manage to exist in this world and invent reasons why it had to have come from nothing.  It's illogical, unscientific (Science can't observe 'nothing') and just plain wrong.  If our Universe had a beginning (and science assures us it did), its existence necessitates an uncaused cause.  More than this, the design, functionality and beauty of our Universe (even though it is broken) shows us the creativity of God.  Paul says everyone gets creation and there are therefore no excuses for not believing in the Creator.  And when people suppress this truth and believe lies instead, God hates it and gets angry because he loves the people he has made and he wants us all to know him. 

People's thinking continues to be 'darkened' in many ways and the truth about God is exchanged for many things, none of which deserve to come first in our lives.  The building of our lives around anything other than God is 'idolatry' (worshiping something else in place of God).  People love to do whatever they want and act as god of their own lives.  Interestingly, this almost always leads to the devaluing and abuse of sex whether through the enjoyment of pornography, casual sex, gay sex or adulterous sex. For now, people are 'given over' and totally allowed by God to run their own lives and sin (wrong thoughts, words or actions and neglecting good thoughts, words or actions) to their hearts' content.  God hates it and gets angry because he loves the people he has made and he wants us all to know him.

Paul specifically mentions gay lust and sex as being sinful.  This is frequently misquoted and misunderstood by Christians and non-Christians alike.  Some will say God hates gay people and it's wrong to be gay but that's NOT what it says here.  Others say love is love and God's fine with gay relationships provided they're loving but that's NOT what it says either.  Paul is explaining that one way in which people sin sexually is to actively desire and have sex with the same gender.  This doesn't mean it's wrong to be gay (to be same-sex attracted) but it is wrong to CHOOSE to sin sexually and to spend time thinking about sinning sexually and this is just one of the ways people do that.  It's unnatural and falls short of the best God intends for us.  God hates it and gets angry because he loves the people he has made and he wants us all to know him.

Incidentally, in our culture, singleness and community are both incredibly undervalued.  If a gay person decides to remain single and abstain from sexual relationships in obedience to God, they're not ruling out personal fulfillment.  Marriage is great but our happiness is not dependent on pairing up.  I know lots of people who have stayed single their whole lives and they wouldn't have it any other way.  They aren't lonely because they're committed to friendships and are plugged into a community.  Our sadness at the suggestion that gay people might choose not to pursue romantic relationships is part of our 'darkened' thinking because we think sex is more important than God in our culture.  God hates it and gets angry because he loves the people he has made and he wants us all to know him.

If you were faced with a glass of water with a big log of poo in it, you wouldn't drink it!  What if it was just a little bit of poo floating on the top?  You still wouldn't drink it!  Why?  Because poo is poisonous and dangerous.  This is what sin is like to God.  And no-one is off the hook.  We all sin in some of the various ways listed.  We all make selfish decisions to put ourselves first instead of God.  God hates 'little' sins as well as the 'big' ones because all sin is destructive, it's all against him and keeps people from knowing him.  God hates it and gets angry because he loves the people he has made and he wants us all to know him.

What should we expect from a perfect good God who created us and gave us life to love him back and be like him?  How long should we expect him to tolerate our sin?  Should we expect him to let us live forever?  If he did, he would not be a good God and there would be no justice.  The God of the Bible promises ultimate justice for all the sin in this world there has ever been or will be.  No-one gets away with anything!  Unless God intervenes in a dramatic way, we can all expect death and separation from God in the end.  What would it be like if God let us 'into heaven' as we are?  Heaven would just as messed up and broken as this place is.  If God is real and perfectly good, something radical needs to happen to us before we could ever expect anything good from him.  For now, we experience the natural consequences of a world that is generally running away from God instead of towards him. 

What do you think you deserve from God if he is a morally perfect judge? 

Bear in mind, your answer to this reveals how well or how little you understand God (how holy or good he is), and how well or how little you understand yourself (how far we fall short of him).

The good news will come later in Paul's writing, but before we can understand it properly, we need to grasp the bad news and the seriousness of our sin.

BACK

Moses is not the hero - Exodus 4:1-17

In every flipping film I've seen about Moses (and there are loads!), Moses is always made out to be the hero of the Exodus story - A strong, wise leader, usually with an impressive beard.  But that's NOT how the Bible tells it.  Moses improved as a leader but to start with he was weak, reluctant and surprisingly stubborn when it came to doing what God said...

Stop and read Exodus 4:1-17

"What if they don't believe me...?".  It's a fair enough question.  No-one's going to take seriously the guy who says "The bush told me"!  So in the previous chapter God told Moses WHO to say it was that was sending him.  Not a bush, but the great I AM - the God of your fathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.  But even though Moses knows it's God speaking, what if the Egyptians aren't convinced?

So God graciously shows Moses 2 amazing miracles that he could perform on demand to prove to the Egyptians that he really did have the power and authority of God behind him.

But Moses is still hesitant.

He makes excuses about not being a very good speaker.  But he's missed the point.  It's not supposed to be Moses' amazing oratory that convinces people but God's power.  That's why God's answer was the 2 miracles and not, "Don't worry Moses.  People will believe you because you do great speeches!"  Moses is slow to realise that God's power will do the talking.

God reassures Moses and shifts his focus from himself to God.  "Who made people's mouths?"  Moses should know this is all about God and what HE can do. 

Then it becomes clear that Moses DOES get it but is simply not willing to do what God says.  He's stubborn.  God will use this stubbornness later with Pharaoh but refusing to submit to God is completely inappropriate!!  Moses should know better.  He's defying God.  "I don't want to.  Make someone else do it."  After all the grace God has shown him!  What a stinky attitude!!  And we all do it!

Understandably, God gets angry with Moses (a moment we don't usually see in the films) and effectively God says, "Oh alright then, go and get Aaron and he can help you speak."  In other words God, even in his anger, is gracious again and gives Moses extra help, but he's ultimately uncompromising in his command for Moses to obey him. 

So Aaron will do the talking and Moses will handle the miracles.  Again, not what we see in the films. 

So Moses is NOT the hero of the Exodus story.  GOD IS!  And you are not the hero either.  God is! 

Will you trust him to be the hero of your story...
or will you resist as if it's all about you?

Back to Exodus blog

11. Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? - Part Two: The Explanation

In parts 10 and 11 we are considering the historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus.  If he's just another dead guy who had ideas about God, then Christianity is false and we can ignore it.  But if he really did come back from the dead, we should take Jesus very seriously and believe what he said about who he is (God) and why he came (to save people from their sins).  Trusting him could save and transform our lives and give us a real relationship with God both now and forever!!

The empty tomb of Jesus,
experiences of resurrection appearances
and the disciples' firm belief that he'd risen from the dead
are all matters of well-attested historical record that require explanation.

The next question to ask is: What is the BEST explanation for these 3 historical facts?  Is the resurrection story really more plausible than the alternative naturalistic explanations offered for the evidence we have?

Summary

1. The Conspiracy Theory says the disciples faked Jesus' resurrection by stealing and hiding his dead body and then spreading the lie that he had risen.  But...

• Jews at that time had no concept of a rising Messiah so this plan would not have made any sense to them.
• These disciples were willing to die for their belief that Jesus had risen.  People don't willingly allow themselves to be tortured and killed for something they KNOW to be a lie.
• This theory does nothing to explain the numerous experiences of the resurrection appearances of Jesus.

2. The Apparent Death Theory says Jesus didn't really die on the cross but merely passed out and later revived in the tomb, escaped and convinced people he had risen.  But...

• Romans were expert killers and knew how to make sure people were definitely dead!  Even if Jesus had managed to survive the cross (impossible), he would have died in the sealed tomb.
• Even if he survived the cross (impossible) and the tomb (impossible), he would have had to move the stone from the entrance (which took several healthy men to move) and then take on the Roman guard to escape!
• Even if he did all this (impossible), a tortured and half-dead Jesus would hardly be in any state to convince anyone he had risen from the dead.  Anyone who met him would see that he was in need of urgent medical attention!

3. The Displaced Body theory says that Joseph of Arimathea (whose tomb Jesus borrowed) moved Jesus' body to a criminals' graveyard and that's why the disciples found the tomb empty and believed Jesus had risen from the dead.  But...

• Jewish laws prohibited the moving of corpses after they had been buried.
• The criminals' graveyard was close to the site of execution, so there would have been no need to bury it somewhere else first and then move it.
• Also, once the disciples started saying Jesus had risen, Joseph could have (and surely would have) corrected them.
• And again, this theory does nothing to explain the numerous experiences of the resurrection appearances of Jesus.

4. The Hallucination Theory says the experiences of the appearances of Jesus alive after he died can be put down to people's minds playing tricks on them in their grief.  But...

• Jesus appeared many times in many places, and not just to individuals but groups and to a crowd of over 500 people at once.  And to skeptics as well as believers.  This kind of mass-scale hallucination simply does not happen.
• The jewish disciples' first thought would not have been (and wasn't) resurrection anyway because it was not part of their belief system at all.  They thought he was a ghost until he proved otherwise (Lk 24:39).
• This theory doesn't even attempt to explain the empty tomb.

The 4 most popular naturalistic theories fail to explain the 3 historical facts we have considered.

The resurrection of Jesus from the dead is the only explanation that accounts for:

• The empty tomb
• The resurrection appearances
• The disciples' willingness to die for their belief in the risen Jesus

If God exists, miracles are possible and we should not rule out this final explanation.

"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." (Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, stated by Sherlock Holmes).


Questions

1. Do you believe God raised Jesus from the dead?  Why or why not?

2. What do you make of the various naturalistic theories to try and explain the 3 historical facts we have been considering?  How would you explain them?

3. What are the implication for you if the resurrection really happened and Christianity is true?  What would you say to God about this?

Back to Zangmeister Reasonable Faith Videos

10. Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? - Part One: The Facts

Jesus claimed to be God himself, coming into our world to save people from their sins so they could be forgiven and live with him forever in a world free from sickness, suffering and death!

If Jesus rose from the dead, we should take his claims seriously!  Christianity is true.

And if he didn't, he's just another dead guy with wrong ideas.  Christianity is false.

The Bible even says this:

And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.

(1 Corinthians 15:14) 

So how strong is the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus from the dead?  What do we know?

This video explores that...

Summary

There are 3 main well-attested historical facts that require explanation:

1. The discovery of Jesus' empty tomb.

• 6 independent early sources (Lk 24:1-12, Jn 20:1-8, 1 Cor 15:3-5, Mk 16:1-8, Mt 28:1-10, Ac 2:29-32).
• Women discovering the tomb (likely true because a plausible hoax in that culture would have had men discovering it).
• The Jewish authorities circulated a false story about the empty tomb.  This should also increase our confidence that there was one!

 
2. The appearances of Jesus alive after his death.

• Paul's list of witnesses: Peter, the 12, crowd of 500+, James, the apostles, himself (1 Cor 15:3-8).
• Various appearances are independently confirmed in the gospel accounts.
• We can be confident that many individuals and groups had experiences of Jesus appearing to them alive after his death.

3. The disciples' belief that Jesus rose from the dead. 

• As Jews they had no concept of a Messiah being killed and raised.
• They would have believed Jesus was under God's curse when he died (Dt 21:22-23).
• Yet Jesus' disciples suddenly and sincerely believed he had risen from the dead and were even willing to die for this belief.

So why was Jesus' tomb found to be empty after he had been buried in it?
Why did so many people experience appearances of Jesus alive after he died? 
Why were Jesus' disciples willing to face death for their belief that he had risen from the dead?

These are all questions for the next video, but for now, let's consider the CERTAINTY of these facts...


Questions

1. Why should we think that the empty tomb of Jesus is a historical fact?  If this were the only known fact, what alternative explanations could be suggested?

2. Why should we think that people really did have experiences of seeing Jesus alive after he died?  If this were the only known fact, what alternative explanations could be suggested?

3. Why is it curious that the Jewish disciples of Jesus suddenly and sincerely believed he had risen from the dead?  How do we know they were sincere?

4. Why do these 3 historical facts require explanation?  And what possible explanations are there?

Back to Zangmeister Reasonable Faith Videos
Next video: 11. Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? - Part 2: The Explanation

9. Who Did Jesus Think He Was?

Jesus, splits history in half (BC/AD).  2000 years after his death, nearly a third of the world claim to be Christians.  More books have been written about him, more songs sung to him, more paintings painted of him than anyone else in human history.

Who is he?  

Nearly everyone believes SOMETHING about Jesus.  He's in all the major religions too.  He's simply too big a deal to ignore.  But only Christians believe he is God.

Did Jesus actually make this claim?

You might say, "So what if he did?  Doesn't mean it's true!"  But although others have claimed to be God, they all tend to be dangerous cult leaders or those who are deluded or mentally unwell.  None of them (or anyone else ever), have impacted the world like Jesus. 

So we should be curious about what Jesus actually said about himself.

This video is about that...

Summary

The vast majority of modern historians, both Christian and non, are convinced that Jesus certainly existed and that his life and words can be investigated historically, just as we would with other ancient figures such as Plato, Aristotle, or Alexander the Great.

Historians, both Christian and non, treat the New Testament records as an ordinary collection of ancient documents to determine the life and words of Jesus.  Here is what they find...

1. Jesus claimed to be THE MESSIAH.  By riding into Jerusalem on a donkey (an event attested to by independent sources), Jesus was decisively and provocatively claiming to be: The Victorious King, Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Anointed One, Righteous, Bringing Salvation, Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace, described in the ancient Jewish scriptures.

2. Jesus claimed to be THE SON OF GOD.  His parable of the vineyard shows clearly that he thought of himself as the only Son of God, God's final messenger, not simply another of the prophets, and the heir of Israel.

3. Jesus claimed to be THE SON OF MAN.  Jesus refers to himself this way over 80 times in the gospels.  It's a clear reference to the "son of man" in an ancient Jewish prophecy in the book of Daniel.  One who ultimately rules over everything and everyone (Daniel 7:13-14).

With these three titles (and in many other ways), Jesus clearly claimed to be the very God his accusers worshiped...

The majority of modern historians, Christian and non, are agreed that the historical Jesus...

• Claimed to be God and was accused of "blasphemy", because the Jewish leaders rejected this.
• Claimed to have divine power to heal the sick, drive out demons, revise the Jewish law, and forgive sins.
• Claimed that people's eternal destinies hinged on whether or not they believed in him.

Jesus' self-understanding cannot be reduced to that of a Jewish teacher or a charismatic leader.  He was claiming repeatedly and emphatically that he was and is God himself.


Questions

1. Are you surprised by the fact that most modern historians, Christian and non, are confident, not only of Jesus' existence but also quite a bit about what he said and did? 

2. Are you surprised that Jesus claimed to be God?  Why or why not?

3. How could Jesus be SOMETHING GOOD but NOT GOD if he was someone who kept claiming to be God?  Why would someone who is a good person but not God, keep insisting they are God until they were killed for this claim?

4. Why do you think he's had such a huge impact on the world?  Who do you think Jesus really is?

5. What if it's true that God has shown up in human history so that we might really know him?  If it's actually true, what would you say to God about this?

Back to Zangmeister Reasonable Faith Videos
Next video: 10. Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? - Part 1: The Facts

8. Suffering and Evil: The Probability Version

In the previous video we saw that the existence of suffering and evil doesn't logically rule out the possible existence of God.

It's possible there is a God who has perfectly good reasons beyond our current understanding for allowing the suffering and evil we see in the world.

But is it likely that such a God exists?  Or should we think that the existence of suffering and evil means there's probably no God?

This video deals with that idea...

Summary

"Suffering provides empirical evidence that the existence of God is highly unlikely."

But...

1. We are not in a position to say that God probably lacks good reasons for allowing suffering and evil.  We are limited in space and time, intelligence and insight whereas God knows everything from beginning to end.


2. Relative to the full scope of evidence, God's existence may well be probable.  The probability of God's existence may well increase if we consider more information than simply the existence of evil and suffering.


3. The Christian worldview entails beliefs that increase the probability of the existence of suffering and evil as well as God (see below).  If Christianity is true, it's not at all improbable that suffering and evil should exist.

• The main purpose of life is not happiness but rather to know God and that this alone brings true and lasting fulfillment (better than mere 'happiness').  Suffering can help people know something is wrong with the world and that they need to know God.
• People are in a state of rebellion against God and his purpose.  Human beings are capable of terrible evil acts that demonstrate this.  Christians aren't surprised at moral evils in the world.  They expect it. 
• God's purpose is not restricted to this life but spills over beyond the grave into eternal life.  Christians can say, "Our pain in this life will not endure forever but our lives with God WILL!"
• The knowledge of God is an incomparable good.  Relationship with God is the ultimate human fulfillment.  So even on their worst days of suffering, a Christian can say, "God is good to me."

So the intellectual arguments from the existence of suffering and evil, ultimately fail to disprove God's existence.


Questions

1. What's your view of God? 

If he ACTUALLY exists, do you think (like Stephen Fry) that you would get to stand and judge him, tell him off or tell him he owes you better?

Or is your thinking more like a guy I met once who said, "I'm not sure I want to meet God because I'd expect him to be so awesome that my face would melt or I'd explode because I'm so tiny and sinful compared to him."?

Which of these two views of God do you identify with most?  And why?

2. If God ACTUALLY exists, do you think he knows FAR more than we do about everything?  If not, why call him God?  But if so, why should anyone be certain he probably wouldn't create a world in which suffering and evil came to exist?  If he exists, isn't it INEVITABLE that he has perfectly good reasons beyond our current understanding for allowing the suffering and evil we see in the world?

As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

(Isaiah 55:9)

3. What other kinds of evidence should we consider that might increase the probability of God's existence?  What kind of evidence do you think makes the existence of God more believable? 

4. How does the Christian worldview (and the 4 doctrines the video describes) make sense of the suffering and evil that exist in our world as it is now? 

5. Why do you think it is that countries that have endured the most hardship often show the highest growth rates for Christianity?  Why should they find the Christian worldview compelling?

6. "Not only does God exist, but he loves you, he seeks after you, he offers you hope.  And in time he will make all things new."  Stop and think.  "What are the implications for me IF THIS IS TRUE?"

And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ‘Look! God’s dwelling-place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. “He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death” or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.’

(Revelation 21:3-4) 

Back to Zangmeister Reasonable Faith Videos
Next video: 9. Who did Jesus think he was?

7. Suffering and Evil: The Logical Problem

If God is good and loves us and is all powerful, then how can there be suffering and evil in the world?

It's perhaps THE big question that gets asked most often by people who aren't convinced God exists.  At least it's a question that gets asked a lot in relatively rich western countries.  (THAT should make us think!)

How can God and evil both exist?  This video gets into it...

Summary

The logical problem of suffering argues:

Premise 1. It is impossible for God and suffering to both exist.
Premise 2. Suffering exists.
Conclusion: Therefore God does not.

But premise 1 contains 2 hidden assumptions:

ASSUMPTION 1. If God is all-powerful, he can create ANY WORLD HE WANTS.

But God can't FORCE people to FREELY CHOOSE what he wants.  That would be logically incoherent.

ASSUMPTION 2. If God is all-loving, HE PREFERS A WORLD WITHOUT SUFFERING.

But how could we possibly know this?  Isn't it possible God might allow suffering to achieve a greater good?

The logical argument fails to show that it's logically impossible for God and suffering to both exist.


Questions

1. For the logical problem of suffering to succeed, the atheist would have to show that:

It's logically impossible that free will exists

AND

It's logically impossible for God to have good reasons to allow suffering

Do you agree?   If not, how else could the logical problem of suffering work???

2. Do you think it's possible there is a God who has perfectly good reasons beyond our current understanding for allowing the suffering and evil we see in the world?

If YES - then you already know the logical problem of suffering doesn't work.

If NO - Why do you think that God (if he existed) couldn't possibly know more than you?  Have you misunderstood the word "God"?  Or do you really think you have perfect knowledge?

3. Why do think prominent atheist philosophers have given up on the logical problem of evil?

Back to Zangmeister Reasonable Faith Videos
Next video: 8. Suffering and Evil: The Probability Version 

6. The Ontological Argument

Ok, this one is an argument that I find slightly more convoluted, but if you're happy to jump inside a philosophical thought experiment for a moment, it does make very good sense. 

In 1078, a Christian monk from Canterbury called Anselm argued that:

"If God POSSIBLY exists, then God ACTUALLY exists."

Really?

Actually, as with all good philosophy, I think this argument has some common sense thinking in it that is fairly intuitive when you stop to think about it.

So hang in there!  The video unpacks it for us...

Summary

This argument is mainly about the essential nature or definition of God.  God by definition is a "Maximally Great Being", (nothing greater than God) and is ESSENTIALLY:

ALL-POWERFUL

ALL-KNOWING

MORALLY PERFECT

IN EVERY POSSIBLE WORLD

(ways the world could have been)

So if we're talking about something that fails to be one of these things, then we're not talking about "God" any more, by definition, but rather, something less than God.

If God exists in ANY possible world (ways the world could have been), then he exists in EVERY possible world, including the ACTUAL world.

If this argument is sound, the atheist would have to show that it is IMPOSSIBLE that God exists, because the concept of God isn’t logically incoherent or self-contradictory (like a square circle).

It's a little bit like saying that God, by definition, cannot NOT exist!


Questions

1. Do you think it's at least logically POSSIBLE that God exists?  God being:

ALL-POWERFUL (nothing more powerful)

ALL-KNOWING (nothing unknown to him)

MORALLY PERFECT (nothing morally superior)

IN EVERY POSSIBLE WORLD (no world where he could not exist)

Is God an intuitively coherent idea (unlike a square circle or a married bachelor)?

If so, this argument says that God ACTUALLY exists.  What do you make of this logic?

2. Have a look at the summary of the argument below.  How strong do you think the argument is?  Do you think it falls down at any point and if so, where?

3. If the notion of God (as described in this argument) is intuitively coherent and God possibly exists, then it follows that he cannot fail to exist (or he would not be God).  In other words: God essentially exists!  And if anyone says he doesn't, they're talking about something less than God.

Agree or disagree?  Why?

OK, thought experiment over!  Well done!  :)

Back to Zangmeister Reasonable Faith Videos
Next video: 7. Suffering and Evil: The Logical Problem

5. The Moral Argument

How do we know right from wrong?  Especially when people disagree about right and wrong?

Parents often say something similar when their kids complain that all their friends are doing something they're not allowed to do: "Just because they're doing it, doesn't make it right!"

St Augustine (very clever ancient Christian dude) said, "Right is still right even if no-one is doing it.  Wrong is still wrong even if everyone is doing it."

Was he right?

Or wrong?

And how do you KNOW?

This video is about that!

Summary

The moral argument for the existence of God can be summarised as follows...

Premise 1: If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist.
Premise 2: Objective moral values and duties DO exist.
Conclusion: Therefore God exists.

"God's nature provides an objective reference point for moral values."

"If there's no God, there's no objective reference point.  All we are left with is one person's viewpoint, which is no more valid than anyone else's viewpoint."

"Atheism fails to provide a foundation for the moral reality every one of us experiences every day.  The existence of morality points us directly to the existence of God."


Questions

1. Richard Dawkins, the famous atheist, (affirming the 1st premise), said that in a world without God, "...there can be no evil and no good... nothing but blind pitiless indifference."

Do you agree?  Why, or why not? 

2. "Just as our sense experience convinces us that the physical world is objectively real, our moral experience convinces us that moral values are objectively real."

Do you agree?  Why, or why not?

And if not, the implication (by definition) is that you're affirming subjective morality (the kind that changes from person-to-person, has no objective basis and is not binding on anyone else).  So...

3. Are child abuse, racism and terrorism morally wrong for all people in all places at all times?  Or is it down to personal preference or opinion?

If they're absolutely wrong, on what basis are they absolutely wrong?

If they are not, is Dawkins right in question 1 and how is it even possible to live a truly "good" life and not simply the life you personally prefer?  And what would you say to the person who prefers to live a selfish, greedy life at the expense of other people and says, "Who are you to tell me I'm wrong?"

4. Can you be good without God?  Why/why not?

Back to Zangmeister Reasonable Faith Videos
Next video: 6. The Ontological Argument

4. The Fine-Tuning of the Universe

Fred Hoyle was an atheist astrophysicist and cosmologist.  Despite not believing in God, he said our universe is so precisely tuned for life that it looks like "...a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology...", and that "...there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature..."

Hoyle compared the random emergence of even the simplest cell to the likelyhood that "a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials..."  And he compared the probability of obtaining even a single protein by chance combination of amino acids to a solar system full of blind men solving Rubik's Cubes simultaneously.

What are the chances of our universe being so well adjusted for us to live in it?

Summary

This video highlights the various constants and quantities that determine the structure of our universe.  These numbers are finely tuned within an infinitesimally small life-permitting range.  If just one of these constants were slightly different, there would be no stars, planets or life anywhere at all.

Atheist and physicist David Deutsch said,

"If anyone claims not to be surprised by the special features the universe has, he is hiding his head in the sand.  These special features are surprising and unlikely."

What is the best explanation of this incredible reality we enjoy every day?  We have 3 live options...

- NECESSITY: The universe MUST be finely tuned and life-prohibiting universes are impossible.
- CHANCE: We just got really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really lucky!
- DESIGN: It was done on purpose by an intelligent, powerful Creator.

The first one is false because life-prohibiting universes aren't impossible - they're actually a lot more likely.

The second is false because the chances are so extremely small.  So people dial up the odds by suggesting there could be a multiverse - like a bubblebath of universes - many without life and a few like ours that do have life.  But:
- There's no evidence for this
- Whatever generated these universes must itself be finely-tuned
- Laws of probability mean that you would find patches of simple life scattered within some of the universes and not an entire universe like ours which is so finely tuned throughout to make life possible.

This leaves the third possibility.  The reason our universe has the appearance of design... is because it was designed!  Created by God.  The most obvious answer is sometimes the right one.  And when we compare it to the alternatives in this case, it certainly seems to be the most plausible explanation.


Questions

1. Why do you think it is that our universe is so finely tuned in so many ways, so that if just one of these constants were a tiny bit different, there would be no stars, no planets and no life?

Or to ask it another way...

The atheist scientist Stephen Hawking said, "The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life."  What or who could possibly be responsible for this "remarkable fine-tuning"?

2. Which of the three explanations do you find most plausible?  And why?  What do you make of the objections to the first two?

3. Do you think it's possible our universe has the appearance of design because it's been designed?  Why or why not?

"The heavens declare the glory of God;
  the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
Day after day they pour forth speech;
  night after night they reveal knowledge.

Psalm 19:1-2

Back to Zangmeister Reasonable Faith Videos
Next video: 5. The Moral Argument

3. The Kalam Cosmological Argument

The comedian Frank Skinner said...

I have friends who are atheists. There’s this mate of mine. He says, ‘It’s such rubbish. Come back to my flat and I’ll make a cup of tea and we’ll talk the whole thing through.’ So I go back with him and he puts the kettle on. ‘The thing is, Frank, the universe – it just happened. A big bang, an accident, no one made it happen. There’s no great designer, no thought went into it or planning, it just happened – do you get it? … Anyway, that cup of tea won’t make itself.’

I said, ‘Why not?’

What does it mean that our universe has a beginning?

 

Summary

Premise 1: Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

Premise 2: The universe began to exist.

Conclusion: Therefore the universe has a cause.

And logically (because of what it caused to begin), we can say that this cause must be spaceless, timeless, immaterial, uncaused and immeasurably powerful.
 

This argument doesn't conclude that God exists (much less that the Christian God exists), but simply that there must be a cause with these qualities. 

I would add - If it's not God, it's something an awfully lot like him!!

Questions

1. If the conclusion of this argument is false, what's the alternative?  How could our universe have come into existence UNCAUSED?  Try answering that question without describing a CAUSE.  It can't be done!

2. Some people say, "Quantum Physics has particles that spring into existence uncaused", but how can this really be "uncaused" if:

a) ...it's happening within the space-time universe where there's already space, time, matter and energy all over the place?

b) ..it's happening in a way that's repeatable by scientists setting up the experiments where these things happen?

If it's impossible to get something from nothing, then it's also impossible to get nothing now that there's something!  In other words, how could we ever genuinely recreate the initial conditions of the universe at its beginning now that it's here?  It's logically impossible!

3. Some people say, "Then who caused God?"  But we know that our universe had a definite beginning in the finite past.  That's why we're having this discussion in the first place.  The point is, the first thing that began to exist must have a cause that didn't!  How could anything have EVER existed unless there was something that ALWAYS existed?

4. Some people say, "This is a God of the gaps argument" and they'd rather say, "We just don't know what the cause was."  But this admits there IS a cause.  And besides, it's not an argument based on what we DON'T know but on what we DO know!  We DO know our space-time universe had a definite beginning in the finite past.  Try question 1 again!

Back to Zangmeister Reasonable Faith Videos

Next video: 4. The Fine-Tuning of the Universe

2. Leibniz's Contingency Argument

Ever wondered why anything exists?  Gottfried Leibniz, a German philosopher who lived over 300 years ago, said one of the most important questions human beings ask is, "Why is there something rather than nothing?"  He said the answer to this is ultimately found in God...

Summary

Premise 1: Everything that exists has an explanation of its existence, either in the necessity of its own nature, or in an external cause.
Premise 2: If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.
Premise 3: The universe exists.
Conclusion: The explanation of the universe's existence is God.

"The only adequate explanation for the existence of a contingent universe is that its existence rests on a non-contingent being - something that cannot not exist because of the necessity of its own nature."


Questions

1. If it were enough to simply say, "the universe exists and that's that", why do people everywhere intuitively wonder about the reason it exists... and why shouldn't they?

2. Do you understand and agree with the distinction between:

• Things that exist contingently (because they are caused by something else - they don't have to exist) and... 
• Things that exist necessarily (by necessity of their own nature - they cannot not exist)?  

And why or why not?

3. "It's logically possible that this universe might not have existed", but the same cannot be said of God.  Why not?

4. Is it reasonable to call the explanation of the universe "God"?  Or do you prefer, "The extremely powerful, uncaused, necessarily existing, non-contingent, non-physical, immaterial, eternal being, who created the entire universe and everything in it"???

Back to Zangmeister Reasonable Faith Videos
Next video: 3. The Kalam Cosmological Argument 

1. Is There Meaning to Life?

At some point, every human being asks themselves, "Why am I here?" or "What's the purpose of all this?" or "What's the meaning of life?"  This video ties these questions to the even bigger question of whether or not GOD exists...

Summary

Since 'no God' means there's no big purpose or plan or moral standard for everyone, atheists must choose between being happy (as if their choices have meaning or significance) or being consistent (living in despair that there's no meaning or purpose to life).

"If atheism is true, there is no legitimate basis for saying that behaving one way is any worse than behaving any other way.  So it really doesn't matter how you live your life.  Your day-to-day choices are meaningless."

Atheist Bertrand Russell said, "We must build our lives on the firm foundation of despair."
But most atheists want to live a happy life.  The problem is this is makes no sense without God, objective purpose or objective morality.

You can tell the whole world you're an atheist... but you can't live like one!

NOTE: The word 'objective' comes up a lot in the video.  In this context it simply means 'independent of and unaffected by human opinion'.  It's about something that's ultimate, absolute and unchanging, regardless of how human beings choose to think and behave.


Questions

1. If there's no God or great mind behind the universe, do you agree there's also no big (or objective) plan or purpose for the universe or for human beings?

• If you don't agree, where else could 'the reason for the universe' come from, since it can't come from anything IN it?
• And how do you feel about the atheist idea that our universe ultimately has no big plan or purpose?

2. If there's no God or great mind behind the universe, do you agree there's also no big (or objective) standard for morality or measure for what makes an action or a life "good"?

What do you think about the alternative ways people try to determine right from wrong and what constitutes a 'life well lived'?

• Evolution - But doesn't this simply imply 'survival of the fittest' rather than morality? 
• Human social convention - But does this make things like racism and murder 'unpopular' rather than actually wrong?
• Human flourishing - But in a world without God, why should human life be more important or valuable than other species of life?  And what happens when humans disagree about the best way to flourish?

3. What does it really mean to live as if there's no God, no big plan or purpose, no real standard of morality or anything to say a selfless life is better than a selfish life?

Do atheists have to choose between being happy (as if their choices have meaning or significance when really they don't) or being consistent (living in despair that there's no meaning or purpose to life)?

What's wrong with trying to be happy in this life without God or a big purpose or moral law?  And what would Bertrand Russell say to this question?

4. What are the implications for all this IF GOD DOES EXIST???

Back to Zangmeister Reasonable Faith Videos
Next video: 2. Leibniz' Contingency Argument 

Zangmeister's Reasonable Faith Videos

Are you a deep thinker?

Zangmeister has produced amazing short animated video summaries of the arguments popularised by Christian Philosopher - Dr William Lane Craig, Founder of Reasonable Faith.

The links below will take you to a blog post to watch each video, read a summary of the arguments and some key questions well worth asking people if they have objections.  These questions should serve to open up conversation.

The Zangmeister Reasonable Faith videos specifically relate to the EVIDENCE for Christianity, but it's worth remembering that this is not the only way to approach the question of God's existence or the question of whether we should trust and follow Jesus.  Thinking is good, but try praying too.  If God wants to help you and your friends to know him, talking to him about that would be a good idea!

Let's dive in!

1. Is There Meaning to Life? 
What difference does it make if God actually exists or not?

2. Leibniz's Contingency Argument
Why is there something rather than nothing?

3. The Kalam Cosmological Argument
What does it mean that our universe had a definite beginning in the finite past?

4. The Fine-Tuning of the Universe
Why does our universe appear to be carefully and skillfully designed?

5. The Moral Argument
How can we tell right from wrong?  And can you be good without God?

6. The Ontological Argument
How can God, by definition, NOT exist?

7. Suffering and Evil: The Logical Problem
Does suffering mean God's existence is IMPOSSIBLE?

8. Suffering and Evil: The Probability Version
Does suffering mean God's existence is IMPROBABLE?

9. Who Did Jesus Think He Was?
How do historians know if Jesus really claimed to be God?

10. Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? - Part One: The Facts
What are the well-attested historical facts that require explanation?

11. Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? - Part Two: The Explanation 
What is the best explanation for the well-attested historical facts?

Back to 'Why follow Jesus?'

Falling Plates

No specific teaching topic lined up for this week and so here's a video we think is brilliant...

Let's keep talking! :)

Q&A at St Peter's Summer 2019

Thanks to the students at St Peter's for all your questions!  Here are some of the answers from the leaders.  We don’t always know.  We don’t always agree.  But we tried our best to share what we know from what God says in the Bible and from our relationship with him so far.   

Do look up the Bible verses.
Do check out the links.  
Do pray.  

And never stop asking BIG questions!

1. How do you know your God exists?

• Creation (Romans 1:20).  How do you get something from nothing in the beginning without God?  Conscience (Romans 2:15).  Where do right and wrong come from if not God?  Christ (John 1:18).  Who is Jesus?  Transformed lives too.  Check out www.iamsecond.com.
• I don't know. There are strong arguments for, and strong arguments against, but when it comes down to it, the highs and lows of life are a lot richer if there is a God, and I think that is significant to me when asking if God exists. 
• In Creation! In the world, you and me! I have an active and living relationship with him. 
• For me the evidence of God is seen clearly through creation. The beauty of the world we live in is so specifically designed with everything having a purpose and working together. For me that is the perfect example of God being the creator of it all. Nothing is out of place. The uniqueness of human beings, and how we are made completely individually is again an amazing example of how God planned each one of us for a purpose. I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and he during the time he lived on this earth he stated 'if you have seen me, you have seen the Father.' (John 14:7). He was the physical representation of God himself on earth to us, and that is another reason why I believe God exists. Romans 1:20, Psalm 139:13-15.

2. Have you ever doubted God? 

• Yes but I don't doubt he exists any more and I don't doubt that everything he says is true.  I have lots of questions, but I know he can handle those, even when he won't give me a clear answer yet.  I trust him with my life.  Proverbs 3:5-6. 
• Sometimes I doubt if God exists, but if he does exist I never doubt that he is good. He's in charge, he's the Gaffer, so if he built this universe then I trust that he knows what he's doing.
• Yes – Especially when my Grandad died. 
• Yes I have. However, that is why it is very important to understand that God created us for relationship with him. A heart-to-heart connection. He didn't create us to gain lots of knowledge about him and just to know of him in our heads – having lots of information about a person does not mean that you actually know that person. Understanding the person of Jesus Christ and who he is, has the ability to greatly help us understand the existence of God. 1 John 4:10, Genesis 1:27-28

3. Do you think sex before marriage is wrong?  Plus have you? 

• It's wrong because commitment should come before intimacy.  Why give yourself to someone who hasn't made strong promises to be faithful to you?  People get hurt that way.  God knows what's best for us.  The best sex is in marriage!  I'm glad I waited!!  Genesis 2:24. 
• I'm not married but I have had sex. I think 'hit it and quit it' culture is damaging and you can build long term mental health issues from having someone reject you when you're at your most vulnerable, therefore having the security of marriage is the most healthy way to sustain a sexual relationship. 
• Yes I think it is wrong, I think it’s best to wait as I did for my husband. Genesis 2:24-25 show that from the very beginning, God’s design for sex has been between a man and a woman in the context of marriage. Waiting till marriage means saving it for the one you are going to be united/joined with for life. ‘The joy of intimacy is the reward of commitment.’
• Before knowing Jesus I did not understand the true value of sex within a marriage. Marriage is the representation of God's commitment and loyalty to his people. It is an example of unity and a bond that should not be broken. It is a life-long promise to honour, respect, and love the person in front of you. And sex is a powerful act that was created to bind a person physically and spiritually to another. It's an act of love that God created. It isn't a light hearted moment created to share with several people, as there is something very powerful that happens during that moment. God created chemicals within us that are released in that moment, which biologically attach us to that person. And every time it happens with another person we are damaging what God intended to be in the context of a loving and committed relationship. It's for our benefit, not to stop us enjoying our lives, and used in the wrong way it can be very painful and damaging to a person. Ephesians 5:22-32

4. If you were alive in Jesus' time, what would you do to help Jesus through HIS hard times? 

• I love this!  God isn't immune from suffering.  He's suffered the worst of all on the cross!  Our mess became his mess when he became one of us and suffered and died on the cross (2 Corinthians 5:21).  Would I have helped him?  I really don't know.  But I'm so grateful. 
• Jesus seemed to really value loyalty to him and his loved ones, so if I was alive in Jesus' time I think I'd try to be as loyal as I could to him, his father, his family and his friends. 
• Pray with him when he most needed it (Matthew 26:36-44).

5. Will Jesus have a relationship with EVERYONE no matter what? 

• Everyone who comes to him for forgiveness - yes.  Jesus died to save people from sin but not everyone wants saving.  Some people are trying to fix themselves without God's help.  God doesn't force anyone.  Christianity is an invitation.  1 John 1:9, 2 Corinthians 5:20, John 1:12. 
• Yes. Most people who wrote the Bible did far worse stuff that we could ever do in one lifetime, and they were some of Jesus' closest friends. 
• It’s not Jesus that makes the decision it’s us. He extends his hand of friendship to everyone but we need to take it. Our own pride and sinfulness get in the way. Jesus died on the cross for our sins, so that we could be in relationship with him. It’s not something we earn – It’s by grace (Romans 3:22-24).

6. Where does Andy get his clothes? 

• Andy buys anything that is cheap and black, because he has no self control when it comes to over-eating and black is slimming.

7. What does 'ALPHA' mean or stand for? 

• It's the first letter of the Greek alphabet.  The New Testament part of the Bible was originally written in Greek.  The Alpha course is for people wanting to explore or get started with the Christian faith.  Check out Alpha. 
• The beginning. 
• Revelation 1:8, Revelation 21:5-6 – The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines Alpha this way: ‘Something that is first. Other words for Alpha include beginning, creation, and origination.’

8. How close are you to God and why? 

• Closer day-by-day because that's what he promises (2 Corinthians 3:18) and because that's my experience too.  He loves me and is helping me know him more. 
• The longer I know God the closer I am to him because the more of life we have shared together and been through together. 
• I can always be closer to God but reading my Bible and worshipping are personally the main ways I can get closer to God.

9. If God is good and loving, why does he allow suffering? / Why does God not stop suffering or natural disasters and just let them happen? / Why does God let diseases (e.g. cancer) spread and kill innocent people? / Why is there poverty? / Why did you create cancer? / Why do you let children suffer? / Why do bad things happen to good people? / Why does God let us feel so much pain? / Why does God kill his people (people dying in Africa)? / Why does God put all the bad things in the world like sadness, anger, hate, and death? 

• This is a big one.  People suffer because there's something wrong with the world and with each of us.  The world is broken.  We are broken.  God didn't break anything.  People did.  The question is: Will we face suffering with or without God?  Revelation 21:1-4, Romans 5:3-5, Romans 8:18, 1 Peter 5:10.  Check out this blog.
• I've had terrible things happen in my life and I have no idea why God let it happen, I choose to trust that his plan for humanity and for my life, is better than the one I would choose to play out if I was God. 
• God doesn’t cause suffering. He has the power to stop it but he allows it to happen. God has given us free will and all the problems we see in the world today are caused by humanity’s sinfulness. Sometimes bad situations are an opportunity to put our focus on God and rely on him for strength.

10. How old were you when you decided that you would follow Jesus? 

• I was 5.  I prayed a prayer with my mum for Jesus to come into my heart.  And he really did! 
• 17, at a youth music festival called Newday. 
• Even though I grew up in a Christian family I only committed my life to Jesus when I went to ‘Soul Survivor’ (Christian Camp) and then I got baptised when I was 18.
• I was 20 when I first truly understood that Jesus is the son of God, and died for my sins, rose again, and conquered death, so that I could have an everlasting relationship with God. Firstly here on this Earth and then forever in eternity. I didn't know until that point that I had been created for a purpose and for relationship with God who loves me and made me the person I am. John 3:16
  

11. Why is love a good thing as sometimes people get angry in love and sometimes break up? 

• The Bible says that we know what love is by what Jesus did for us on the cross (1John 3:16).  Love is more than feelings.  Love includes determined commitment, quality choices, and selfless sacrifice.  To learn to love one another we need help from the God who is love (1 John 4:8). 
• Every good thing in life can be twisted into something bad; money can be used for good or for bad, school can be good and bad, food can be good but if Ryan is cooking it can also be bad. The same with love. Love can bring security, intimacy, a feeling of being truly known, but if twisted it can also bring jealousy, manipulation, and abuse. Don't miss out on something great because you're scared of the 'what ifs'. 
• Love is a great thing! It’s a choice often to put someone else first, that sometimes means getting angry. For example, seeing people suffer and wanting to stand up for them. Good, loving relationships are always worth fighting for but require hard work and sacrifice.
• Sadly, humans are deeply broken people with a sin nature, which means we get things wrong a lot! We can struggle to do relationships well and we have a great ability to hurt one another, even when we love people. The only person who is perfect is Jesus Christ and only he can truly love as God intended love to be. There is a beautiful passage about love in 1 Corinthians 13:4-8, which talks about love and is a very positive example of what it could or should look like. We so often get love wrong and love can be very badly displayed in our lives even through the people we care about the most. That is why we can only truly depend on the love of God because his love alone is perfect. Other people physically can't give us everything we need, only God can do that. And only he can restore the hurt we may have experienced through another person's actions. Psalm 23:3, 1 John 4:18

12. Who goes to hell? 

• Only those who persistently refuse and resist God's repeated offers of forgiveness and love through Jesus.  No-one deserves to live with God forever in a perfect world.  It's a gift to be received by faith in Jesus.  But everyone deserves to be separated from God and that's what hell is. John 14:6, 2 Peter 3:9, Romans 3:22-24. 
• The devil and his demons. 
• Rather than thinking of hell as a place, think of it as being out of relationship with God. Those who reject God, choose to have a life without him. Eternity spent in the absence of God, Author of all things that are good - is hell. Acts 4:12.

13. Who is Jesus? 

• Jesus is God.  John 1:18, John 8:58, Colossians 1:15-20.  Check out this video.  And also the Alpha film on this question. 
• The most influential person in all of human history and someone who claimed to be the Son of God. 
• Fully human, fully God. A perfect example of what God is like and his love for us. Tempted in every way yet faultless (Hebrews 4:14-16), he was a perfect sacrifice that paid for our sin and enabled us to be reunited with God. John 14:6, Matthew 16:16 – Son of God.

14. How do we know the Bible is true? 

• It claims to be (2 Timothy 3:16-17).  It seems to be (you need to read it to experience it - try starting with John's gospel).  It proves to be - try applying the promises of God in the Bible and see if he keeps them!  Check out Bible Gateway, Topical Bible and 365 Promises. 
• Many people who are much smarter than I am have explained to me why they think its true and they've convinced me. 
• The Bible is the true and living word of God. God used the Bible’s authors to convey his message, guiding them through visions, dreams and their own experiences. 2 Timothy 3:16 says, “All Scripture is God-breathed.” Archaeological discoveries have confirmed many events of the Bible. Hebrews 4:12 – The Bible is alive in the life of a believer.

15. How do I know that God is living in me if I am a Christian (which I am)? 

• Because we can trust the promises of God and he says anyone who turns from sin and trusts in Jesus will have God himself come and live in them by his Spirit.  Revelation 3:20, Romans 8:9, Luke 11:13. 
• Take him at his word. In the Bible, God says, “If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, I will live in you” (Romans 10:9). That is a promise. He's not trying to trick you by saying ‘oh you didn't say or do the right thing so I'm not going to live in you’.  No.  If you truly believe then he is yours and you are his. 
• As the Spirit, God is available to everyone and will enter anyone who believes into him. When we pray to receive the Lord Jesus, God lives within us by the Holy Spirit (John 14:26). John 14:23-27 – We know we have the Holy Spirit because (1) we will obey him (v23), (2) learn and be reminded of scripture (v26), (3) have peace (v27), and (4) have courage.

16. How do Christians know if it's really God working in our lives if we cannot see him? 

• Sometimes because there's no other possible explanation for what happens!  Other times it's because we know every truly good thing is a gift from God (James 1:17), or because the result is that we and those around us grow to know and love Jesus more (John 16:14).  Also because he promises to be at work in our lives if we know and love him (Romans 8:28). 
• The definition of a miracle is 'an event that is not explainable by natural causes alone'. The only time I see God working in my life is when something happens that I cannot explain without God being real and being involved in my life. For example, if someone hurts their knee and overnight it gets better, maybe that was God, or maybe it was just the effects of the pain killers. But if someone's amputated leg completely grows back, that ain’t no painkillers, that’s a miracle.
• It is a super-natural process. God works on us from within. Galatians 5:16-18 – our natural inclination is to do something that is against God. We can only obey him because his power, the Holy Spirit, is at work within us. John 1:18 – Jesus came and lived on the Earth, people saw him. Romans 10:17 – We hear God through his word the Bible.