Review of Taking Religion Seriously
My review of Charles Murray’s recent book, Taking Religion Seriously, appears in the Fall 2026 issue of Reformed Faith & Practice.
My review of Charles Murray’s recent book, Taking Religion Seriously, appears in the Fall 2026 issue of Reformed Faith & Practice.
Westminster Seminary Press has kindly granted permission for me to post a preprint version of my essay, “Van Til Versus The Matrix: A Van Tilian Response to the Simulation Hypothesis,” originally published in The Future of Reformed Apologetics: Collected Essays on Applying Van Til’s Apologetic Method to a New Generation (2024). The essays are all based on lectures delivered at Westminster Theological Seminary during the 2023 Conference on Reformed Apologetics. Other participants included Brian Mattson, Dan Strange, Scott Oliphint, and Christopher Watkin.
It was a fun topic to tackle: I hope you enjoy reading the essay as much as I enjoyed writing it!
Last summer saw the publication of a new ‘counterpoints’ book on methods for defending the faith, Understanding Christian Apologetics (Tyndale/Hendrickson). I had the privilege of explaining and defending the presuppositional method, most famously associated with Cornelius Van Til. Here’s the full line-up of contributors:
Classical Apologetics – Melissa Cain Travis
Evidential Apologetics – Sean McDowell
Presuppositional Apologetics – James N. Anderson
Cultural Apologetics – D. A. Horton
Ecclesial Apologetics – Timothy Paul Jones (also volume editor)
Each main chapter defines and defends the author’s favored approach in 5,000 words, followed by 1,000-word responses from the other four contributors.
The book was originally planned to include case studies to illustrate each approach, but in the end the publisher decided to put these in a downloadable study guide.
In February, I had the great pleasure of joining Dr. Jones for a bookstore event at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, where we each gave a brief presentation on our contributions to the book, followed by an audience Q&A:
I’m also pleased to share that this year’s meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society will feature a panel discussion between the contributors (with Ben Shaw standing in for Sean McDowell, who is unable to attend). Hope to see some of you there!
The messages from the recent Faithful Conference, hosted by Christ Covenant Church, Matthews, NC, with keynote speakers from Reformed Theological Seminary, are now available here.
The conference theme was “The Courage to Be Protestant.”
Here are the direct links to the YouTube videos:
The audio versions are also available on the Christ Covenant Church podcast.
Yuval Noah Harari is an Israeli historian, bestselling author, public intellectual, and secular prophet (or ‘futurist’ as they prefer to be called). Speaking out of his Darwinian naturalist worldview, Harari recently offered this message on “International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia”:
Here’s a transcript of the video clip, in which Harari draws a connection between Darwinism and “sexual liberation”:
Darwin is the kind of prophet of sexual liberation. If I think about the liberation of gay people, of LGBTQ people, then if you dig underneath, you eventually find Darwin. For centuries upon centuries, gay people were persecuted and oppressed because of this mythological idea about sex: that sex was created by God for the purpose of procreation, and if you use sex for anything else, you’re sinning against the purpose of the thing, so you must be punished. And then Darwin came, and Darwin said: in biology there are no purposes. Nothing has any purpose in biology. In biology there are only causes.
Where does this go wrong? Let me count the ways. Well, let me count three at least.
1. If Harari thinks “this mythological idea about sex” comes from Christianity, he’s mistaken. Christianity does indeed teach that sex was created by God for the purpose of procreation (Gen. 1:28), but it doesn’t follow that procreation is the only purpose of sex. In 1 Corinthians 7, the apostle Paul implies that sex within the bond of marriage is legitimate for the proper satisfaction of sexual desire. He makes no reference to procreation in that context. The Song of Solomon celebrates sexual intimacy and joy within marriage, again without reference to the purpose of procreation. Even if procreation is the primary purpose of sex, that wouldn’t make it the exclusive purpose. Just as eating food is both for nutrition and for pleasure, so marital sex is both for procreation and for pleasure. …
Darwin, Sex, and Rationality: Yuval Noah Harari’s Self-Defeating WorldviewRead More »
[A short article originally written for the ILIAD Forum.]
Logic is simply the science of reasoning and argumentation. In essence, the study of logic is concerned with inferences: what conclusions we should—or shouldn’t—draw from one or more premises (initial assumptions or claims). Logic distinguishes between good inferences (i.e., reliable forms of reasoning) and bad inferences (i.e., flawed forms of reasoning).
It might sound strange to suggest that logic itself could be evidence for God. Isn’t logic just a tool that people use to evaluate evidence for (or against) God or to construct arguments for (or against) God’s existence? Certainly. But the very fact that there are laws of logic, and our minds have access to such laws, is a truly remarkable thing. To say that there are laws of logic is to say that laws of logic really exist. But whatever they are, laws of logic cannot be material things, like subatomic particles or electromagnetic waves. The laws of logic don’t have physical properties like mass, electric charge, or spatial location. They are non-material, non-physical entities. The laws of logic have been aptly called laws of thought or laws of reason: they are norms or principles that govern thinking and reasoning.
…
The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.
Not my words, of course, but those of the outspoken atheist Richard Dawkins in his 2006 bestseller The God Delusion. I gather that when Dawkins went on tour to promote the book, the above was his favorite passage to read out to his audiences, and it never failed to win a round of applause from his fellow skeptics. (Some two decades later, it’s noteworthy that he didn’t accuse God of being transphobic — just as well for Dawkins, given that he has been charged with that very sin.)
Christopher Hitchens offered the same argument at length in his 2007 book God Is Not Great. Indeed, it was a common theme among the New Atheists: Christianity is not merely false, but positively immoral, and that second failing is underscored by the immoral actions of the God of the Bible himself. It’s not only Christians who behave badly; their God behaves badly too!
It’s a serious charge that deserves a serious response. In the eighth book in The Big Ten series, my colleague Richard Belcher brings his expertise in the Old Testament to bear on the questions raised by skeptics and sincere inquirers. Doesn’t the God of the Israelites command genocide and endorse slavery? Isn’t he cruel, racist, and misogynist? Doesn’t he act like an egotistical narcissist, demanding that people worship him on pain of death? Why does the God of the Old Testament seem so violent and hateful?
Belcher tackles head-on the various “problem texts” of the Old Testament, arguing not only that that they have often been misinterpreted and misrepresented, but also that they need to be understood in light of what the Bible teaches about God’s goodness, justice, power, and grace. Unless one grasps the bigger picture of the biblical worldview, one will never understand why Christians throughout history have found no conflict between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament — which is just to say, the God revealed in Jesus Christ. The concluding chapter of the book turns the tables with a thought-provoking question. Which should we consider more problematic in the end: the God of the Bible, or the absence of the God of the Bible?
Although the New Atheism has now fizzled out, many of its arguments have spread widely into the culture—not least the idea that the God of the Old Testament is mean, vicious and hateful. In this thorough, well researched book, Richard Belcher explores why this argument fails. It will be a helpful addition to any pastor’s library! — Andy Bannister, Director, Solas Centre for Public Christianity, UK
Despite its small size, this book provides deep and rich reflection on tough texts in the Old Testament. Tackling all the hottest topics head on, Belcher shows that it is atheists, not Christians, who have the toughest case to answer. — Peter J. Williams, Principal, Tyndale House, Cambridge, UK; author of Can We Trust the Gospels?
Here’s the table of contents:
Like the other entries in The Big Ten series, the book is substantive and scholarly in its content, while also engaging, readable, and gospel-focused. Consider giving a copy to any skeptical friends or colleagues who dismiss the God of the Old Testament as a ‘moral monster’. It might just help them see the God of the Bible in a very different light.
A cordial conversation with Keith Mathison and Kevin DeYoung about the theology and apologetics of Cornelius Van Til, prompted by the publication of Keith’s book Toward a Reformed Apologetics:
Even with an hour and 20 minutes, we barely scratched the surface of the issues raised in Keith’s book, but I think it was a helpful exchange nonetheless, and I hope it can serve as a model for ongoing discussions between Van Til’s advocates and his critics. Kevin did a fine job as both moderator and mediator!
Go here for the podcast version.
A conversation with my friend (and boss!) Mike Kruger about the challenges and opportunities of Christian apologetics today:
Back in the 90s, there was a British TV show called Men Behaving Badly. (For the record, I never watched it, so don’t quiz me on the details!) I sometimes wonder how long it will be before someone creates a TV show called Christians Behaving Badly. There would be no shortage of material, I’m sure, and it could run indefinitely. That’s not a happy thought, if you’re a Christian. It’s an even less happy thought that you (or me) might be featured in one of its episodes.
Christian apologetics has often focused on philosophical, historical, and scientific objections to the faith. How can the existence of God be reconciled with the existence of evil? Why think that the Gospels are reliable sources for the life of Jesus? Doesn’t the theory of evolution render incredible the biblical account of human origins? And so on. But in my observation, the most common objections to Christianity are increasingly moral ones. Sometimes they take the form of moral objections to the teachings of the Bible or the teachings of Christ. Frequently, however, they take aim at the immoral behavior of Christians. The Crusaders. Christian slaveholders. Philandering televangelists. Homophobic fundamentalist preachers. The driver who cut in front of you the other day and nearly caused a pileup (yeah, that guy’s fish sticker won’t be leading anyone into the arms of Jesus).
Arguably it’s not merely a moral problem for Christianity; it’s an evidential problem. If Christianity were true, wouldn’t we expect Christians to be better behaved that non-Christians? But they aren’t. So isn’t that evidence against the truth of Christianity? As one of Nietzsche’s lines has been paraphrased: “I might believe in the Redeemer if his followers looked more redeemed.”
In the seventh book in The Big Ten series, pastor-scholar Mark Coppenger wrestles honestly with the problem of “bad Christians.” Coppenger begins by scrutinizing the title question (“If Christianity is so good, why are Christians so bad?”) and suggests we need to think carefully about how the question itself is framed and what assumptions lie behind it. The remaining chapters explore what the Bible and the history of the church actually teach us about the behavior of professing Christians, about the nature of Christian conversion, about the effects that the gospel has had on individuals and societies, and how Christianity fares when compared with its religious and non-religious competitors. The verdict? Yes, there have been (and will continue to be) many “bad Christians,” but when the balance of evidence is taken into account, the scandal of Christian hypocrisy gives us no good reason to reject the claims of Christ himself about his identity and his mission. Indeed, the sin of hypocrisy is just one of the myriad human failings for which Jesus came to make atonement. (As someone once quipped, “If you think the church is full of hypocrites, don’t worry — there’s always room for one more!”) In addition, Coppenger argues, Christians have been given various ‘antibodies’ with which to fight the ‘infection’ of sin in their own lives and in the church as an institution. He also makes the insightful point that our modern principles of religious liberty and freedom of speech, which allow non-believers to criticize Christians and hold them publicly accountable, have historically Christian roots. Christianity has thus supplied the instruments for its own correction.
Here are some of the endorsements for If Christianity Is So Good, Why Are Christians So Bad?:
This book models concise expression, shrewd logic, clear organization, subtle wit, brutal honesty, graphic illustration, cultural savvy, and charitable characterization of opponents. It answers the title’s question as much by showing how to think about the matter as by seeking out best answers. — Robert W. Yarbrough, Professor of New Testament, Covenant Theological Seminary, St. Louis, Missouri
Over the last 25 years whilst running Christianity Explored courses at my local church – All Souls, Langham Place – I have had to say on every course that the poet Swinburne said, ‘I would love Christ, where it not for his leprous bride, the church.’ I then plead with people to not allow their experience of so–called Christians in the church to stop them looking at Jesus. This book will be a very helpful tool for us at All Souls with some people who come to investigate but have had their hearts broken by the behaviour of Christians they’ve known. I’m so grateful for it and have already made a mental list of those whom I need to send it to. — Rico Tice, Evangelist; Co–founder of Christianity Explored Ministries
This book doesn’t whitewash the bad behaviour of many Christians, but it also offers some helpful insights, theological context, and practical wisdom for how Christians can respond to this important challenge. — Sean McDowell , Professor of Christian Apologetics, Biola University, La Mirada, California
And the table of contents (with some intriguing chapter titles):
If you know someone who has been soured toward Christianity by the bad behavior of Christians, this book won’t solve the problem itself (what book could do that?) but it will help to bring some fresh thinking and a more balanced perspective to the issue.