Podcasts about evidentialism

Dr. Alex Plato is an associate Professor of philosophy at Franciscan university. He has done extensive study of Elizabeth Anscombe, Post-Liberalism, and Epistomology. He and Matt speak on Capitalism, Distributism, and Evidentialism. Support and Follow Alex's Work:   @Platos_Academy   https://platosacademy.locals.com/ Support us on Locals: https://mattfradd.locals.com/support Show Sponsored By: https://hallow.com/mattfradd  https://strive21.com/matt

Strengths & Weakness Of Evidentialism We conclude our look at the second model of apologetics by looking at the strengths & weaknesses of evidentialism. And like good trinitarians, there are three of each. Some of the weaknesses, also, seem to add credibility to one of our upcoming methods. Hmmmm. Timeline: 00:00 - Introduction 01:39 - 3 Strengths Of The Evidentialist Model 01:59 - Strength 1 - Probability Is Unavoidable 04:40 - Strength 2 - Appeals To Inquiry Strengths 07:13 - Strength 3 - Emphasizes Facts 09:48 - 3 Weakness Of The Evidentialist Model 10:26 - Weakness 1 - Assumes The Theistic Worldview 14:24 - Weakness 2 - Uses Hidden Presuppositions 17:54 - Weakness 3 - Underestimates The Human Factor 20:32 - Minimizes The Noetic Effect Of Sin 22:17 - What's Next? 26:10 - Conclusion BOOK LINKS: Faith Has Its Reasons By Kenneth Boa & Robert M. Bowman Jr. Kindle Paperback Logos

The Meta & The Apologetics Of Evidentialism Today we fly through the meta & the apologetics of evidentialism as it shares a number of qualities with classical apologetics we've discussed before. Here we tend to highlight the differences between the two or where the evidentialist tends to focus more of their arguments. Timeline: 00:00 - Introduction 02:04 - The Interpretation Of Facts 07:02 - Relationship Between Evidence & Theology 08:39 - Evidentialists & Philosophical Defense 11:49 - Evidentialists Using Science But Not Uncritically 13:04 - Evidentialists Using History Positively 15:20 - Evidentialists Use Rarely Use Experience Claims 16:56 - The 6 Questions All Evidentialists Must Answer 17:37 - Evidentialists On Why Believe The Bible 19:06 - The Evidenitalist Response To Pluralism 19:58 - The Evidentialists Talk About How To Know God Exists 22:31 - Evidentialists Answer To The Problem Of Evil 24:37 - Evidentialists Point To Miracles 26:20 - Evidentialists Point To Who Jesus Is 28:21 - Conclusion BOOK LINKS: Faith Has Its Reasons By Kenneth Boa & Robert M. Bowman Jr. Kindle Paperback Logos

Author and speaker Iain Provan joins the podcast to discuss his recent book, Cuckoos in Our Nest: Truth and Lies about Being Human. Contemporary Western culture offers up various visions of what it means to be human, visions that many within the church have unknowingly adopted yet which contrast sharply with biblical revelation. Like the murderous offspring of the cuckoo bird, once these ideas take root, they drive out biblical assumptions of anthropology, even while masquerading as Christian. In this episode, Iain highlights three of these “cuckoos” and explains their effects on Christian thinking, addressing such questions as: What is the relationship between science and faith? What are the origins of current ideas about the self? Which sources should Christians consider authoritative? How does culture catechize the church? How can the church identify and dethrone the cuckoos that have already taken hold?

In this episode I discuss the difference between evidentialism, which I wholeheartedly embraced when I was younger, and presuppositional appologetics, which I'm coming to love in recent years. These two options aren't only arbitrary approaches to apologetics, but reveal deeper theological truths. Does evidence prove God? Or do we all have an innate knowledge of God like Scripture says? In reality, a consistent Christian must be presuppositional, and we can do this while still studying the evidence that exists for various theological truths.Support the show Check out all my links here https://linktr.ee/goodmonstersSupport the Show! https://www.patreon.com/goodmonsterSpare no Arrows on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVwB26yxtYWUopfFPhAsb8wSpare no Arrows on Instagram https://www.instagram.com/sparenoarrows/Spare no Arrows on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/goodmonsterspodcastCody on Twitter https://twitter.com/wc_lawrenceSpare no Arrows on Spotify https://open.spotify.com/show/6CqhvtMWRItkoiv8ZrJ6zVSpare no Arrows on Apple Podcast https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/spare-no-arrows/id1528869516Podcast Episodes on Buzzsprout https://www.buzzsprout.com/1300948/episodes

An overview of one of the most misunderstood views upon which Dr. Craig has spoken!

An overview of one of the most misunderstood views upon which Dr. Craig has spoken!

Dr. Jonathan McLatchie joins me to discuss religious epistemology. We talk about evidentialism, presuppositions apologetics, classical apologetics, and reformed epistemology. Jonathan's YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/JonathanMcLatchie -------------------------------- GIVING -------------------------------- Please consider becoming a Patron! Patreon (Thanks!): https://www.patreon.com/AdherentApologetics YouTube Membership: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCO8jj_CQwrRRwwwXBndo6nQ/join

In this episode, Brian Auten and Chad Gross interview Jonathan McLatchie. www.jonathanmclatchie.com. Jonathan discusses and critiques presuppositional apologetics, while advocating for an evidential approach to apologetics.1:33 - Resources for Discussing Your Pro-Life Convictions:https://a315.co/3yDTgzl2:35 - Intro to the topic and Jonathan McLatchie5:08 - An outline of various apologetic methodologies14:43 - Has Jonathan always been an evidentialist?15:28 - A helpful debate on apologetic methodology: https://a315.co/3ygEKw016:17 - Cumulative case apologetics / Five views on apologeticshttps://a315.co/3NEIRrw17:16 - Defining presuppositionalism19:07 - How does it differ from inference to the best explanation?20:42 - How does presuppositionalism look different in practice?22:39 - Were people “doing it incorrectly” before Van Til?25:47 - Does presuppositionalism require the triune God of Scripture?26:21 - Ontology and espistemology28:07 - Would this be the method of first-century fisherman?30:18 - Is the method demonstrated in Scripture?32:28 - Arguing in a circle35:07 - What methodology do we see in Acts 17?37:15 - What value can we take away from the presuppositional approach?37:53 - Talking about neutrality40:16 - Jonathan's case for evidentialism43:58 - In summary…46:06 - www.talkaboutdoubts.comCheck out Jonathan's resources:www.jonathanmclatchie.comwww.talkaboutdoubts.comWe appreciate your feedback.If you have a question or comment for the podcast, record it and send it our way using www.speakpipe.com/Apologetics315 or you can email us at podcast@apologetics315.com

Epistemology is the field in Philosophy that focuses on what Knowledge is, how we know (or whether we know) what we think we know. Get ready to go a million miles an hour with professional epistemologist Dr. Trent Dougherty, editor of the Oxford University Press book "Evidentialism and Its Discontents" available for purchase here on Nile, Mississippi, or whatever river you get you books from. E.g., https://www.amazon.com/Evidentialism-its-Discontents-Trent-Dougherty-ebook/dp/B00AQH7F8W/ref=sr_1_3?crid=3BM8FK58OQ5DX&keywords=trent+dougherty&qid=1645212085&sprefix=trent+dou%2Caps%2C119&sr=8-3 We ask him how we know things, what counts as good evidence, what the definition of opinion and knowledge is, is "publish or perish" good for Higher Education , how does one make it as a professional philosopher , and whether sense experience is required for having knowledge . He lists some of the great names in his journey, including Edmund Gettier, the three "RF"s --Richard Fumerton, Richard Foley, and his dissertation chair Richard Feldman--who were almost as important as the late, great Roderick Chisholm. Enjoy also the personal anecdotes in the last half where he shares how he became interested in Philosophy after his conversion to Christianity from paganism, and how he got interested in Epistemology in particular. Welcome, Dr. Dougherty ! The Republican Professor Podcast Team

In this Episode, Andrew and Matthew answer 3 Questions put forth by the YouTube channel, Capturing Christianity. Apparently, these are not supposed to be gotcha questions, but we don't believe Cameron! CC original 3 questions video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89tcsb2aPLI Evidentialism: https://iep.utm.edu/evidenti/#:~:text=Evidentialism%20is%20a%20theory%20about,justificatory%20status%20of%20one's%20beliefs. Planet X: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/hypothetical-planet-x/in-depth/ Kilogram redefined: https://www.npr.org/2018/11/13/666310991/say-au-revoir-to-that-hunk-of-metal-in-france-that-has-defined-the-kilogram To contact us, email: reasonpress@gmail.com Our Theme Music was written for us by Holly, to support her and to purchase her music use the links below: https://hollykirstensongs.com/ https://hollykirsten.bandcamp.com/ --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/still-unbelievable/message

Does Paul's Teaching Line up with Evidentialism or Presuppositionalism? Learn more about John O'Roark's ministry at https://www.fullarmourministries.org

Does Paul's Teaching Line up with Evidentialism or Presuppositionalism? Learn more about John O'Roark's ministry at https://www.fullarmourministries.org

In this episode, Eli moderates this exciting debate/discussion on the topic of apologetic methodology. This discussion is an excellent resource in identifying the key differences between evidentialism and presuppositional apologetics. Enjoy!

A discussion of miracles and Presuppositionalism vs. Evidentialism

A discussion of miracles and Presuppositionalism vs. Evidentialism

Okay, so you’ve decided you want to get better at standing up for what you believe. You’re going go hone your skill at defending your faith and sharing the Gospel. And you’ve discovered the world of apologetics—the discipling vindicating Christian truth against challenges and objections—but now you’ve hit a roadblock… because you’ve discovered (gasp) there are different ways of going about this. See, on the one hand you’ve got “classicalists” who swear by the Kalam Cosmological Argument, and on the other hand you’ve got “evidentialists” who do a great job of giving evidence to prove the “case for faith.” But then on the other other hand, you’ve got presuppositionalist guys like Joel Settecase, who don’t seem to get along well with either of the other groups. So who’s right? Which apologetics method is best? This episode is going to give you the answer. Or at least, it will give you more grist for the mill of your mind, as you work out for yourself what school of apologetics thought you want to align yourself with. That’s because today two Christian apologists are going to have a robust dialogue about methodology, each one presenting his own preferred method and interacting with the other. Specifically, you’ll find out… The backstory of Dean Meadows, how he got into apologetics and what prompted him to launch the Daily Apologist. What exciting work the Daily Apologist is up to right now, and how you can get involved. Why Dean takes a more evidentialist approach to defending Christian truth, why he uses classical arguments—and why he isn’t a presuppositionalist. Whether Joel and Dean think that evidentialism and presuppositionalism are irreconcilable. How Joel "switched teams” from classical and evidentialism to practice #datpresup. Which approach is more biblical, and which one has cooler hashtags. Much more. Joel’s guest today is Dean Meadows. Dean serves as the Executive Director of The Daily Apologist. He holds a B.A. in Theology from the Bear Valley Bible Institute International; B.S. in Bible/Ministry from Amridge University; and an M.A. in Christian Apologetics from Biola University. He's currently pursuing a MSc in Philosophy from the University of Edinburgh, Scotland. Dean served in the United State Marine Corps Reserve for six years and deployed to Iraq in 2006. He is married to Hillary Meadows and they have two kids with very pretty names: Nora-Grace and Wren-Mercy. It’s time to dive into this fascinating topic. Get ready to think. Get more from Dean Meadows Visit the Daily Apologist now. Get the full show notes at https://thethink.institute/podcast --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/the-think-podcast/message

Apologetics? Evidentialism? Presuppositionalism? Evangelism? Say what? See what 1 Corinthians can contribute to these important issues!

Megan Fritts is a philosopher at Utah State University. In this episode, Megan talks with Charles about her work on moral perfectionism, non-causal action theory, and partial evidentialism. She addresses why beliefs are tricky, theory of knowledge is boring, and her husband is most likely not a serial killer—and how human lives are like chess pieces but not the ones spontaneously melting.

Can the fact that something is morally wrong to believe affect whether the evidence you have justifies that belief? In her paper, Georgi Gardiner argues that the answer is "no". We should follow the evidence where it leads and align our beliefs with the evidence. And if we do that, she argues, we’ll discover that morally wrong beliefs—such as racist beliefs--simply don’t align with the evidence. On this view, racist beliefs are irrational because they are unsupported by evidence or reflect cognitive errors in statistical reasoning, not because they are immoral. Links and Resources Georgi Gardiner (https://sites.google.com/site/georgigardiner/) The paper (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1E10KHE0lGSlgyCJVSFr_YrqtFfCxwqG4/view) On the Epistemic Costs of Implicit Bias by Tamar Gendler (https://www.philosophy.rutgers.edu/joomlatools-files/docman-files/Gendler%20(2011)%20On%20the%20Epistemic%20Costs%20of%20Implicit%20Bias%20May%202011%20Phil%20Studies.pdf) Varieties of Moral Encroachment by Renée Jorgensen Bolinger (https://www.reneebolinger.com/uploads/1/0/2/6/102668958/varietiesofencroachment.pdf) Radical moral encroachment: The moral stakes of racist beliefs by Rima Basu (https://philpapers.org/archive/BASRME-2.pdf) Doxastic Wronging by Rima Basu & Mark Schroeder (https://philpapers.org/archive/BASDW.pdf) Beyond Accuracy: Epistemic Flaws with Statistical Generalizations by Jessie Munton (https://80a93457-7df3-471f-8728-538bb500333a.filesusr.com/ugd/131a85_e293fd8b510042e1a63022ca9b3011b9.pdf) Paper Quotes "Advocates of moral encroachment aim to describe a person whose beliefs are epistemically impeccable—well supported by the evidence and conscientiously considered—yet morally wrong because racist. My contention is that no such belief can exist. If a belief is morally wrong then there is some corresponding prior epistemic error. The belief is not well supported by the evidence and/or it is not interpreted through a morally appropriate understanding, and that understanding is not epistemically well supported. If a belief is epistemically well supported it cannot be racist since no true fact is genuinely racist. With the right background understanding we see that since everyone is equal, any differences based on gender, race, and so on are morally insignificant." Special Guest: Georgi Gardiner.

Switching it up from the deepness of Existentialism to the new subject of Epistemology.  We about knowledge of "how" and knowledge of "that", and we tackle a tongue twister from Aristotle on the nature of truth.And did you know that Reliabilism, Evidentialism, and Infallibilism are schools of thought that actually exist?  Oh wait - did I just slip back into Existentialism?  Enjoy!   Jeff

It's a new show! My good friend Keith Darrell (Campus Preacher) will be joining me every Friday to talk evangelism, apologetics, and more. Send us your questions via voicemail or contact us at the addresses below: Aaron Ventura aventura@christkirk.com Twitter: @aaronventura Keith Darrell keithdarrell@gmail.com Twitter: @campusevangel --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/aaron-ventura/message

The number of Christians that know what the word apologetics means is growing, thanks primarily to technology. But many don't understand that there are different approaches to defending your faith. While some of these approaches overlap, some have important distinctions that affect the way we should defend and commend the faith. This episode explores the differences between various approaches to apologetics.

During the summer break, TMR shares another exclusive presentation by the highly-esteemed Christian philosopher Dr. William Lane Craig - this time a Q&A session on his work in Christian philosophy and apologetics. I take the opportunity to share a few items of interest and concern from the media. Back in 2011, my wife and I had the opportunity to go with Reasonable Faith (the organisation headed up by Dr. Craig) on a guided tour of Israel. On many of the evenings back at the hotel Dr. Craig would give a talk, sometimes sharing his reflections upon the historical sites we had visited, but sometimes speaking on broader issues to do with Christian philosophy and apologetics. In this session, Dr. Craig invites questions from the floor regarding arguments he frequently defends in the public square. [The recording included in this podcast is Copyright © 2011 Reasonable Faith, all rights reserved, and used by TMR with kind permission. That Dr. Craig features in this podcast should in no way be understood as implying that he endorses anything else mentioned in this podcast, nor indeed anything else published at TMR. (For show notes please visit http://themindrenewed.com)

During the summer break, TMR shares another exclusive presentation by the highly-esteemed Christian philosopher Dr. William Lane Craig - this time a Q&A session on his work in Christian philosophy and apologetics. I take the opportunity to share a few items of interest and concern from the media. Back in 2011, my wife and I had the opportunity to go with Reasonable Faith (the organisation headed up by Dr. Craig) on a guided tour of Israel. On many of the evenings back at the hotel Dr. Craig would give a talk, sometimes sharing his reflections upon the historical sites we had visited, but sometimes speaking on broader issues to do with Christian philosophy and apologetics. In this session, Dr. Craig invites questions from the floor regarding arguments he frequently defends in the public square. [The recording included in this podcast is Copyright © 2011 Reasonable Faith, all rights reserved, and used by TMR with kind permission. That Dr. Craig features in this podcast should in no way be understood as implying that he endorses anything else mentioned in this podcast, nor indeed anything else published at TMR. (For show notes please visit http://themindrenewed.com)

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner answers listener email related to faith and belief, including skeptical challenges related to becoming a Christian simply because one lives in a Christian nation, and challenges about the evidential strength of the case for Christianity. To submit your own question about Christianity, please subscribe to the daily email on the homepage at ColdCaseChristianity.com and reply to any of the emails you receive, asking your question. J. Warner will do his best to answer some of these questions in upcoming episodes of the broadcast.

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner answers listener email about the existence of variants in the earliest manuscripts we have for the New Testament. Does the fact that ancient copies of the Gospels don’t agree entirely mean that we can’t trust them? How does this impact our notion of Biblical inerrancy? To submit your own question about Christianity, please subscribe to the daily email on the homepage at ColdCaseChristianity.com and reply to any of the emails you receive, asking your question. J. Warner will do his best to answer some of these questions in upcoming episodes of the broadcast.

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner answers listener email about a reasonable Christian response to issues related to gun violence. To submit your own question about Christianity, please subscribe to the daily email on the homepage at ColdCaseChristianity.com and reply to any of the emails you receive, asking your question. J. Warner will do his best to answer some of these questions in upcoming episodes of the broadcast.

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner provides helpful tips for those who want to share the Gospel and the truth of Christianity. What important skills can we glean from those who make a “closing argument” for a living? J. Warner provides several insights to help you make the case. This approach is described in more detail in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.  

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner provides helpful tips for those who want to share the evidence for God or Christianity. What can we glean from professional “evidence presenters” in criminal trials that might help us present the evidence fairly and convincingly? J. Warner provides several insights to help you make the case. This approach is described in more detail in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.  

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner continues to discuss the practices and principles of good investigators and applies these techniques to the Christian worldview. When juries are asked to evaluate a case, they are instructed in the rules of evidence. In this episode, J. Warner discusses three important evidence instructions: 1. Possibilities are irrelevant, 2. The more cumulative the case, the more reasonable the conclusion, and 3. Witnesses are reliable unless demonstrated otherwise. J. Warner demonstrates how a proper understanding of these rules can help you prepare people to hear the case for Christianity. This approach is described in more detail in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.  

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner continues to discuss the practices and principles of good investigators and applies these techniques to the Christian worldview. When juries are asked to evaluate a case, they are instructed in the rules of evidence. In this episode, J. Warner discusses three important evidence instructions: 1. The fact the other side can make a case doesn’t mean it’s true, 2. Everything has the potential to be used as evidence, and 3. Whoever makes the claim, has the burden of proof. J. Warner demonstrates how a proper understanding of these rules can help you prepare people to hear the case for Christianity. This approach is described in more detail in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.  

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner continues to discuss the practices and principles of good investigators and applies these techniques to the Christian worldview. How do detectives eventually communicate what they’ve discovered? How do prosecutors communicate these truths to a jury? Is there anything we might learn from this process to help us communicate the Gospel, and what is the single most important thing we should consider when preparing to share the truth? This approach is described in more detail in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.  

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner continues to discuss the practices and principles of good investigations and applies these techniques to the Christian worldview. How do investigators add to their cases evidentially to establish their case in front of a jury? Can this approach be adopted by Christians to help us defend the Christian worldview? If so, what forms and types of evidence would qualify as we add to the case for Christianity? This investigative approach is described in more detail in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.  

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner continues to discuss the practices and principles of good investigations and applies these techniques to the Christian worldview. How do assemble the evidence they collect to make a proper inference? Are there any techniques or practices we can adopt as Christians to help us defend the Christian worldview? Good investigators know how to organize their case visually. This investigative approach is described in more detail in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.  

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner continues to discuss the practices and principles of good investigations and applies these techniques to the Christian worldview. How do detectives investigate cases, and what can be learned from their approach to document evidence? Can any of these principles be applied to the reading of scripture? Good investigators know how to evaluate evidence broadly and take good notes as they do so. This investigative approach is described in more detail in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.  

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner begins to discuss the practices and principles of good investigations and applies these techniques to the Christian worldview. How do detectives investigate cases, and what can be learned from their approach to document evidence? Can any of these principles be applied to the reading of scripture? It all begins with learning how to read and think carefully. This investigative approach is described in more detail in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.  

In this blast from the past, J. Warner responds listener email questioning the adequacy of circumstantial evidence. Can we really trust circumstantial evidence or must we also have direct evidence to determine the truth of a matter? How does this apply to defending the Christian Worldview? When do we know we have enough evidence to make a decision? J. Warner examines the Casey Anthony trial (one more time) in an effort to understand “evidential sufficiency”.

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner continues his comprehensive description of the difference between teaching and training by discussing the importance of good mentorship. Are you mentoring anyone as a Christian? Do you have a mentor to whom you can look for answers and examples of how to live the Christian life? Given the challenges we face, all Christians must learn how to nurture others on the battlefield of ideas. This training model is described in more detail in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.  

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner continues his comprehensive description of the difference between teaching and training by articulating the need for all Christian believers get involved in the battlefield of ideas. Do you want to change your Christian walk? Do you want to become a more articulate, prepared believer? You can make this change by simply adjusting your calendar. Set the challenge and then study in preparation for the battle you’ve calendared. This training model is described in more detail in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.   

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner continues his comprehensive description of the difference between teaching and training by articulating the need for all Christian believers to study the objections of atheists and the evidence for Christianity. Young Christians must be inoculated rather than isolated from bad ideas. This training model is described in more detail in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.   

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner continues his comprehensive description of the difference between teaching and training by articulating the need for parents and youth leaders to expect more from their children and students. Our kids can typically learn more, engage more deeply, and understand more than we often require of them. How can we “raise the bar” to better prepare them for the future? How can we better prepare ourselves by requiring more in our own process of discipleship? This training model is described in more detail in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.   

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner describes the challenges facing young Christians and introduces his viewers to Summit Worldview Conferences. This premiere program teaches high school students a robust, all-encompassing Christian worldview. J. Warner includes “behind the scenes” video from Summit as he describes why all Christian parents need to take an intentional approach to teaching their kids the truth.

In this podcast, J. Warner talks with Steve Noble from Called2Action Radio about the cumulative case for Christianity from the perspective of a cold-case homicide detective. This broadcast was originally aired on the Called2Action Radio Show; be sure to download their podcast.

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner presents a strategy to equip Christians to defend the truth of the Christian worldview. The “Training” model he describes in Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith begins with a test. Are you ready to defend what you believe as a Christian? Have you tested yourself? Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.   

Join Ross & I as we discuss more arcane esoterica and also continue The Myth of Gender Equality by Drake Shelton.

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner presents a strategy to equip young Christians to defend the truth of the Christian worldview. J. Warner presents the training model described more fully in his book, Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. What is the differences between “teaching” and “training”? Why should we abandon the teaching model in favor of more intentional training? Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.   

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner responds to three common objections to “evidentialism,” the approach toward Christian belief that he describes in his book, Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Why should we use the word “faith” if belief is actually the most reasonable inference from evidence? Why should Christian s make the case to others if God is in control and is ultimately the reason why anyone believes? J. Warner answers these objections and more. Be sure to check out Forensic Faith and the accompanying curriculum.   

In podcast, J. Warner talks with Hank Hanegraaff (the Bible Answer Man) of the Christian Research Institute about his J. Warner’s book, Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. J. Warner and Hank discuss the need for an evidential approach to the Christian faith, and the difference such an approach makes in the lives of Christians today. This broadcast was originally aired on the Bible Answer Man Broadcast; be sure to download their podcast. If you appreciate the great work of the Christian Research Institute, please support this important ministry by purchasing Forensic Faith as part of their ministry premium offer.

In podcast, J. Warner talks with Susie Larson about his new book, Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith. Is there really evidence to prove the claims of Christianity? We often fall into the trap of relying too heavily on the experience of faith when there is a plethora of evidence to back up what we believe. This conversation first aired on the Live the Promise with Susie Larson Radio Show.

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner discusses the importance of becoming a Christian Case Maker. In fact, Christians have a duty to understand and make the case for the truth of the Christian worldview. Why is this the case? How should our duty as Christians shape the way we live? Be sure to check out Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith and the accompanying curriculum.   

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner traces the rich evidential history of Christianity. Unlike other theistic worldviews, Christianity is grounded in the historical events of the first century. As a result, the Christian worldview can be tested unlike any other. But why are so few Christians ready or able to make an evidential defense? Be sure to check out Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith and the accompanying curriculum.   

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner introduces the concept of “forensic faith,” based on his new book (releasing May 1st, 2017). What does it mean to possess a forensic faith and why is it so important? How can this form of belief and Christian faith change your life? Be sure to check out Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith and the accompanying curriculum.   

Listen in as Michael, Clint and Carrie continue their discussion on Evidentialist arguments and the strenghts and weaknesses of this apporach.

Evidentialism is probably one of the most well known methods of Apologetics. Listen in as Michael, Clint and Carrie discuss various arguments used by the Evidentialist camp.

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner examines the Biblical definition of “faith”. Did Jesus advocate “blind faith”? How did Jesus use evidence to demonstrate his Deity? How did Jesus deal with doubt? (For more information, visit www.ColdCaseChristianity.com) 

In this episode of the Cold-Case Christianity Broadcast, J. Warner makes a case for the reasonable nature of the Christian Worldview. Does Christianity require blind faith? Are we to accept the claims of Christianity without evidence or even in spite of the evidence? Or are we called, as Christians, to place our trust in Jesus because of the evidence? Jim also examines the way Jesus responded to those who had doubts. (For more information, visit www.ColdCaseChristianity.com) 

In this podcast, J. Warner talks about the role of evidence in making the case for Christianity and the need for an evidential approach to Christian Case Making. Jim also responds to an excellent blog post addressing his evidential approach to apologetics. Is evidentialism a valid apologetic? What is its relationship to presuppositionalism? Can Mormons claim a valid presuppositional approach to their worldview? Jim also talks about the validity of advanced degrees in apologetics.