Is there any historical evidence for Jesus' resurrection? In this episode, I begin a series to provide an answer to this question. I focus on providing an outline for a historical argument for Jesus' resurrection and then look at evidence for both Jesus' death by crucifixion as well as his burial. 

Some will argue that the sciences provide the only path to real knowledge of the world and that religious beliefs are mere expressions of blind faith, feelings, and cultural upbringing. But is this a good way to think about science, knowledge, and religious beliefs? 

While many atheist evangelists promote atheism as the liberator of the human self, I argue that the true implications of an atheistic worldview paint a bleak picture of the universe that is often not taken seriously. 

What does Christianity have to say about the human condition and our human experience? What worldview best makes sense of the human capacity for greatness as well as the human capacity for wickedness?

I briefly explain a change in the episode format.

Philosophy has a tendency to be misunderstood (and even feared) by many Christians. Does it have any place in the Christian life? Is it largely irrelevant or even something to be avoided? In this episode, I explain why I think philosophy is vital for a vibrant Christian life and seek to clear up some misconceptions about it. 

In this episode I discuss the resurrection of Jesus and why it matters for Christianity. It is the central event of the Christian faith and without it, the Christian hope is without any basis. 

A somewhat popular notion says that religious beliefs are an "accident of birth". This idea is usually expressed in the following line of thought: "If you are a Christian, you only believe in Christianity because you were raised to believe it or perhaps because you were born in a part of the world where it is taught and practiced. But, if you had been born in the Middle East, you would probably be a Muslim. If you were born in Japan, you would probably be Buddhist or Shinto." To some, this idea seems to discredit the Christian faith. At the very least, it seems to make the idea that Christianity can be objectively true implausible. How should we understand this idea about religious beliefs? Is there any credibility to it? What does it mean for the truthfulness of Christianity?

There are a bewildering variety of religious beliefs in the world. People on all sides think their particular religious perspective is true. What implications does this have for religion as a whole? Some have seen such disagreement amongst religions as evidence that no religion is true or that, at best, we should suspend judgment about whether any one of them is true. In this episode, I try to show why I think religious disagreement can actually help us pursue what is true. 

In this episode I discuss a common tactic some atheists use when engaged in discussions with believers in God. This strategy rests upon a redefinition of atheism as merely a lack of a belief in God. But is this redefinition legitimate? What is the purpose of this redefinition? Do atheists have to make a rational case for their position or is this something only believers in God must do?