Search — Theology Explorer

John 3:16 atonement Incarnation righteousness of God

God chose to redeem through the cross to display his love, patience, righteousness, and desire for relationship simultaneously.

Question 15 from Daniel James about why God chose death and resurrection as the method of redemption.

marriage Christian ethics cohabitation

Couples should formalize their marriage as officially as possible rather than treating informal cohabitation as equivalent.

Question 17 from Dasha Castenko about being informally married to a fiance in another country due to COVID restrictions.

1 Corinthians 6 1 Corinthians 6 self-control spiritual disciplines

Gluttony is an underaddressed sin in the American church; fasting is a practical corrective; no need for strict calorie counting.

Question 18 about how to avoid gluttony and whether strict calorie limits are legalistic.

1 Peter Genesis 50 priesthood of all believers Mormonism 1 Peter

Joseph Smith was a demonstrably false prophet; modern Mormonism is a victim of his fraud.

Question 19 from Evelyn Ellsworth (a Latter-day Saint) about the priesthood of all believers and Mike's denial of fellowship to Mormons.

2 Kings 2 prophetic authority word study Elisha

The youths mauled by bears in 2 Kings 2 were not small children but likely young adult men mocking Elisha's prophetic authority.

Question 20 from That One Christian about the children mauled in 2 Kings 2.

Genesis 1:1 Kalam cosmological argument Genesis 1:1 Kalam cosmological argument

The conceptual analysis points toward a spaceless, timeless, non-material, incredibly powerful, exceedingly wise mind — matching what Jews and Christians have always understood from Genesis 1:1.

Conceptual analysis — conclusion

Kalam cosmological argument Kalam cosmological argument conceptual analysis

Objection: the argument doesn't mention God, so it's irrelevant. Response: the Kalam is always the beginning of a case, not the end — it forces you into the conceptual analysis that points to God.

Objection — God not mentioned in the argument

William Lane Craig methodological naturalism William Lane Craig

Objection: what if science one day explains the universe without God? Response: Christians welcome continued scientific inquiry; this objection is "naturalism of the gaps" — hoping naturalism will eventually explain it with no current evidence.

Objection — future science

Kalam cosmological argument cumulative case apologetics Kalam cosmological argument

Objection: this only gets you to generic theism, not the Christian God. Response: each attribute (spaceless, timeless, etc.) was justified, not ad hoc; the Kalam is meant to be followed by evidence for the resurrection to identify the God.

Objection — doesn't prove the Christian God

moral argument design argument Kalam cosmological argument

Classical apologetics typically combines the Kalam with design arguments and a moral argument (showing God has moral principles and loves people), building a cumulative case before presenting Christ.

Cumulative case approach

1 John 4:18 1 John 3:20 assurance of salvation assurance of salvation 1 John 4:18

Q&A: A sermon claiming that struggling with addiction or fearing hell means you're not a Christian is unbiblical. Paul rebuked the Corinthians for sin without denying their faith; 1 John 4:18 says fear indicates incomplete realization of God's love, not absence of salvation.

Q&A — addiction and assurance of salvation

apologetics apologetics mocking opponents

Q&A: Is it okay to mock atheists? Mike and Braxton both lean toward cordial conversation. Mockery has a legitimate place biblically but easily leads to responding "in the flesh." Most people aren't discerning enough to mock wisely.

Q&A — mocking atheists

Revelation 2 (Ephesus) first love Revelation 2 (Ephesus) spiritual stagnation

Q&A: When a Christian feels static in their walk, the answer is to fall in love with Jesus again rather than legalistically checking boxes. Pray for increased love and dedication; remember first works (Revelation 2, Ephesus).

Q&A — spiritual stagnation

Matt Dillahunty Kalam cosmological argument Cosmic Skeptic

Q&A: The Kalam's premises can be confirmed — an infinite past is philosophically untenable, and universal human experience confirms that things beginning to exist have causes with zero counterexamples.

Q&A — can the Kalam premises be confirmed?

evidence for God evidence for God Braxton Hunter

Closing: Mike encourages viewers who are convinced to start seeking God, praying, and paying attention to Christ. He promotes Braxton Hunter's YouTube channel as a resource for apologetics.

Closing exhortation and promotion

John McCrae apologetics apologetics Cameron Bertuzzi

Mike Winger introduces a panel response to Genetically Modified Skeptic's video "4 Questions That Could Make You an Atheist," joined by Braxton Hunter, Cameron Bertuzzi, and John McCrae.

Introduction — response to Genetically Modified Skeptic

John McCrae hermeneutics hermeneutics sin nature

John McCrae adds: our sin nature explains interpretive divergence — we read preferences into Scripture. The Bible calls us to strive for truth (narrow gate), which makes the relationship with Christ richer. Drew's question is really just the problem of evil focused on one aspect.

Additional response to Q1 — sin nature and striving

Pascals wager decision theory Michael Rota

Mike responds with three problems: (1) Drew misrepresents Pascal's wager as "believe whatever promises the most" — Pascal actually included evidential evaluation; (2) modern proponents like Michael Rota and Liz Jackson pair evidence with the wager; (3) Pascal's wager is decision theory, not blind gambling.

Response to Q2 — Pascal's wager is misrepresented

false dichotomy Pascals wager

Drew's false dichotomy objection fails because Pascal's wager can be constructed to meet people where they are. If someone is between Christianity and atheism specifically, it's not a false dichotomy — it's their actual situation. Drew also inadvertently grants theism when proposing alternative gods.

Response to Q2 — false dichotomy and evidential grounding

evidence for God evidence for God Pascals wager

Drew's arbitrary cruel God is defeated by evidence: Christianity has historical verification, prophecy, testimony, and wasn't made up on the spot. A maximally cruel God would send everyone to hell with no heaven, giving no reason to worship. This is the "Pascal's mugger" objection, already addressed in literature.

Response to Q2 — arbitrary claims vs evidenced claims

Genesis 1:29-30 the Fall animal suffering Genesis 1:29-30

Drew claims God demanded animal sacrifice because he enjoyed it. John corrects: OT sacrifice was for atonement, an act of mercy, not divine enjoyment. Genesis 1:29-30 shows God originally created a vegetarian food chain — the current system results from the Fall. Drew ignores that Christianity's purpose isn't a pain-free temporal life.

Response to Q3 — sacrifice and the Fall

1 Peter 2:21-23 evolutionary morality early church pacifism 1 Peter 2:21-23

Christianity would be the worst survival-promoting religion if it were invented for that purpose — it teaches loving enemies, not retaliating, turning the other cheek. Early Christians were pacifists for 300 years. This contradicts the "made up for survival" hypothesis.

Response to Q3 — Christianity is anti-survival by design

Isaiah 11 problem of evil problem of evil skeptical theism

Cameron and Mike discuss animal suffering as a serious philosophical problem, but note: (1) atheism offers no solution to suffering at all, (2) Christianity promises resolution (Isaiah 11 — wolf lies down with lamb), (3) Stephen Wykstra's no-see-um principle: we wouldn't expect to perceive overarching goods from specific instances of suffering.

Animal suffering — atheism vs Christianity

free will Alvin Plantinga free will

Good #1: Freely choosing to enter a loving relationship with God is a great good — a love potion analogy shows forced love isn't real love. Good #2: Alvin Plantinga's supralapsarianism theodicy — the Incarnation and atonement (Christ dying for those who hate him) is among the greatest conceivable acts of love, only possible in a world with sin.

Response to Q4 — goods requiring earth (love and atonement)

apologetics apologetics questions are not arguments

Mike's closing: Drew's journey to atheism appears to involve accumulating unanswered tough questions — a shallow understanding of Christianity where questions pile up without pursuing answers. Christianity shows itself to be true; questions may make you an atheist, but answers will make you a Christian.

Closing — questions vs answers

Mike Winger idea 2020-02-19

Q&A: The witness of the Holy Spirit is not primarily an emotion but a witness (like testimony) — the Spirit confirms truths like "I am a child of God" (Romans 8). It can come through Scripture, prayer, or ongoing experience and can be temporarily quenched.

Q&A — witness of the Holy Spirit

Romans 8 Romans 8 witness of the Holy Spirit witness of the Holy Spirit

Mike Winger idea 2020-02-19

Q&A: The argument that life only begins "in the womb" (to justify destroying IVF embryos) fails — it's a location argument. If location determines life, a baby outside the womb would be less alive, which is absurd.

Q&A — IVF and location argument

Psalm 139 Psalm 139 when life begins IVF ethics

Mike Winger idea 2020-02-19

Q&A: Babies killed through abortion go to heaven — supported by David's words in 2 Samuel 12:23 about his dead child. This doesn't justify killing them, just as Christians going to heaven doesn't justify murdering Christians.

Q&A — souls of aborted babies

2 Samuel 12:23 abortion 2 Samuel 12:23

imago Dei when life begins scientific consensus on life

Reason 2 (Teaser Money): Learning that scientific consensus (95% of biologists) affirms human life begins at conception. Since he already believed humans are made in God's image, the biological confirmation made the moral conclusion obvious.

Reason 2 — scientific consensus + imago Dei

Genesis 9:5-6 imago Dei abortion human rights

Reason 3 (Josh): He naturally leaned pro-choice but realized there's no good reason for it from a Christian moral standpoint if human life is sacred. Genesis 9:5-6 establishes that murder requires a reckoning because humans are made in God's image — a universal command to all mankind, not just Israel.

Reason 3 — human life is sacred (Genesis 9:5-6)

Genesis 9:5-6 abortion when life begins Genesis 9:5-6

Objection: Genesis 9 mentions "blood" — does that mean life only begins when blood forms? No — blood represents life (used in Levitical sacrifices, "cleansed by the blood of Christ"). But even if you took it literally, blood forms at day 21, making virtually all known-pregnancy abortions murder.

Objection — blood and the beginning of life

abortion double homicide maternal instinct

Reason 7 (The Real Hope): Becoming pregnant and experiencing the maternal drive to keep the baby alive — it was intuitive, not theological. Mike shares a story of standing outside an abortion clinic when a car accident happened nearby involving a pregnant woman, and the irony of everyone caring about that baby while babies were being killed across the street.

Reason 7 — maternal instinct and the car accident irony

abortion Incarnation and atonement

Mike's closing appeal: abortion is not a women's rights issue — it's a human rights issue. For those who've had abortions: Jesus died for sinners, not just people with minor issues. The cross offers full forgiveness. Don't hide from guilt; take it to the cross.

Closing — gospel appeal

John Walton Genesis interpretation Inspiring Philosophy John Walton Inspiring Philosophy

Q&A: On theistic evolution and Inspiring Philosophy (Michael Jones) — he's a brother in Christ doing his best to interpret Genesis. Mike is personally on the fence about Genesis interpretation, distinguishing the text question (what does Genesis say?) from the science question. John Walton's functional creation view isn't convincing to Mike but it's an in-house Christian debate.

Q&A — Genesis interpretation and theistic evolution

2 Samuel 12:23 abortion 2 Samuel 12:23

Q&A: Babies who die (including through abortion) go to be with God, supported by 2 Samuel 12:23 where David says "I shall go to him" about his dead child. This doesn't justify killing them — you could make the same argument for killing Christians.

Q&A — souls of aborted babies

Luke 14:33 Luke 12:33 Luke 14:33 Luke 12:33 Lydia (seller of purple)

Q&A: Luke 14:33 ("renounce all you have") and Luke 12:33 ("sell your possessions") are hyperbolic expressions of total dedication to Jesus, not literal commands for universal poverty. Lydia continued her business after conversion and used profits to support missionaries.

Q&A — sell everything and follow Jesus

Genesis interpretation Genesis interpretation Noahs flood scope of the flood

Q: Was the flood global or local? Mike is on the fence. The Hebrew word "earth" often means dry ground/land, not planet — even in Genesis where "everyone throughout the earth" comes to Egypt during the famine, it clearly doesn't mean globally. The theology (God judging sin, picture of Christ) is unaffected by scope.

Q&A — scope of Noah's flood

John 14:15 loving God John 14:15

Q: How do you love God more? (1) Obey his commands — Jesus said "if you love me, obey my commands"; (2) prioritize him above everything; (3) delight in his Word. Obedience IS love. Priority means choosing Christ in any conflict of allegiance. "Hate father and mother" is a selection term, not literal hatred.

Q&A — loving God more

Galatians (walk in Spirit) spiritual warfare spiritual warfare prayer and fasting

Q: Feeling attacked by the enemy. Read Galatians on victory over the flesh (crucified with Christ, walk in Spirit vs flesh). Prayer and fasting (Jesus said "this kind only comes out by prayer and fasting"). Deal with obvious sin areas. Trust God even in situations beyond your capacity.

Q&A — spiritual warfare

Hebrews 9:27 Hebrews 9:27 forgiveness after death

Q: Why can't we be forgiven after death? God's mercy is forever, but the question is whether you've received it through Christ. Hebrews: "it is appointed for man to die once, then judgment" — implies permanence of decisions upon death. No biblical reason to think post-mortem opportunities exist.

Q&A — forgiveness after death

eternal security eternal security apostasy

Q: Can you lose your salvation? Mike is genuinely unsettled on this. The question is about apostasy (rejecting Christ), not just sinning. He doesn't have a public teaching on it because he hasn't fully worked through the relevant Scriptures to his own satisfaction.

Q&A — losing salvation

Romans 5 (peace with God) faith alone works as evidence faith alone

Q: Does "saved by faith alone" mean you can sin and still be saved? In one sense yes — salvation is grounded on grace, not works (Romans 5: "having been justified by grace, we have peace with God"). But genuine salvation produces the Holy Spirit, which works out into good works. Works are evidence of salvation, not the means of maintaining it. A person living in reckless sin may never have been saved.

Q&A — faith alone and ongoing sin

false teachers false teachers essential vs secondary doctrines

Q: Difference between a false teacher and someone you disagree with? False teachers violate essential Christian truths (e.g., denying Christ's deity). Secondary issues (like inerrancy debates) are in-house disagreements, not false teaching. The line can get blurry on some issues.

Q&A — false teachers vs disagreement

virgin birth inspiration of Scripture virgin birth

Q: Evidence for the virgin birth? Not as strong as resurrection evidence, but that's okay — not every doctrine needs the same burden of proof. Mike believes it because Scripture teaches it. The argument chain: resurrection → inspiration of Scripture → virgin birth. The central claim (resurrection) carries the secondary claims.

Q&A — evidence for the virgin birth

Q: Why can an atheist be a "better person" than a Christian? Because humans have free will. But our standard for "good person" is skewed — we judge by how someone treats us, ignoring whether they love God. Rejecting the Creator is a massive moral failure regardless of philanthropy. We evaluate select pockets while ignoring what matters most to God.

Q&A — atheists being "better" than Christians

free will free will