Objections Part 1

I had a conversation with a young man the other day kindly discussing his objections to belief in a Creator and in Jesus as God. We didn’t have time to work through all his objections but here are some short answers to his hurdles to faith in Christ. The reason I wrote this is because they are all very common so I thought it may be helpful to address them. I’ve tried to be as brief as possible. Hope this is helpful for others too. 

Objection 1: “The definition of faith is putting away your ability to think logically…” 

In sharing my faith with college students I’ve found this is a common statement made among millennials. The idea that surrendering your life to Jesus is synonymous to surrendering your ability to think rationally is popular among young atheists. The reality could not be further from the truth. I’ll give three reasons why (though there are many). 

• Biblical: The Bible calls us to love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength (Mark 12:30). It was the Apostle Paul’s custom to reason with both Jews and Greeks, trusting God would save some (Acts 17:2, 18:40). 
• External: Some of the most intellectually, scientifically, and logically driven men and women in history have been followers of Jesus. I know there are many examples of ridiculously intelligent people on both sides of Theism/Atheism. However, we should definitely respect those on either side. Few doubters or seekers of Jesus would say theists C.S. Lewis, Blaise Pascal, Descartes etc. “put away their ability to think.” 
• Personal: Since placing my faith in Christ at sixteen I have been challenged to think with more fervor than I ever did before. Especially in my ongoing attempt to understand more fully who God is, what He has done for us in Christ, the Triune nature of God etc. And more so in having to answer good questions from students investigating the claims of Jesus. 

 Objection 2: “Using the logic that the universe had to have a creator, then what created god? It won't work to say that god has always been because then I could say the universe has always been.” 

This is a common objection to theism but the question is a really poor one. God, by definition, is an uncaused Being, a First Mover, Prime Mover etc. God, unlike the universe, had no beginning, so doesn’t need a cause. Some scholars have suggested it is like asking “how long is the smell of a rose?” Given the definition of the noun, the question doesn’t make sense. Also, I feel like the universe being finite is widely accepted in academia. So anyone saying the universe didn’t have a beginning would be disagreeing with the atheistic scientists they so respect. More here. 

 Objection 3: “There is no physical proof or evidence to suggest a god exists…” 

There’s tons of rational evidence and valid arguments for God’s existence. This young man was right, I cannot prove God exist but I know several arguments that overwhelmingly suggest He does. 

• Kalam Cosmological Argument 
• Teleological Argument 
• Ontological Argument 
• Moral Argument 
• Prophecy, Life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. 

Also, anyone could say “[t]here is no physical proof or evidence to suggest a god [doesn’t] exists”. Neither theists nor atheists can prove their position. We both must survey the evidence and make an decision. 

Objection 4: “What historical evidence, aside from the Bible, is there that Jesus even existed? I've tried to research and have found no evidence to suggest that Jesus even lived.” 

This is an objection that really surprises me. Many young atheists claim there is no evidence Jesus even existed. I wonder how anyone could believe in any historical figure from classical antiquity and not, at least, concede Jesus’ existence. Here are some non-Christian authors that wrote of Jesus around the same time period of Biblical authors.

Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:  

"Nero fastened the guilt ... on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of ... Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome...."

Pliny the Younger, 112 AD 

They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food – but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.

There are several others, Josephus, Babylonian Talmud, Lucian of Samosata etc. Remember theses are non-Christian writers. If Jesus didn’t even existed why are they in their history books? Let me know if you want the others or sources. 


I hope anyone reading this knows my heart. I love doubters, skeptics, and seekers. I think all followers of Jesus should love people and help them wrestle through tough questions that have about God/Jesus. Also, I hope you hear gentleness and respect from me. I’m sure this young man (and others who share his views) is a really intelligent person. However, I believe that Jesus Christ lived, died, and resurrected so we could know Him, be forgiven, and live for His glory. For God and the Gospel of Jesus Christ I will use the rest of my life to “beg others, on behalf of Christ to be reconciled to God”. 


Have any questions you would like me to address? Go here and submit them. I'll hopefully get to them soon. 

Therefore, when a person refuses to come to Christ it is never just because of lack of evidence or because of intellectual difficulties: at root, he refuses to come because he willingly ignores and rejects the drawing of God's Spirit on his heart. No one in the final analysis really fails to become a Christian because of lack of arguments; he fails to become a Christian because he loves darkness rather than light and wants nothing to do with God. [William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, (Revised edition, Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1994), pp. 35-36.]

Mormonism: Untrue and Misleading

It has happened to everyone. You are enjoying a Monday afternoon and you get a knock at the door. There they are... your local Mormon missionaries. This happened to me about two years ago and since I always want to be open minded I have studied for awhile the beliefs of the church of Latter Day Saints. After reading a ton and listening to several podcasts, I am deeply bothered by the inconsistencies and glaring lies within Mormon theology. Let me begin by saying that I am praying to be much more loving towards Mormons. I have never had a bad experience with a Mormon but my heart is against them because I am fully assured that they are misleading millions with a false religion that claims Jesus' name. They are taking the true Gospel of Jesus Christ and twisting it into their own theology that is not consistent at all with the Word of God. Therefore, I do not hate Mormons. I am learning to love them and hope to be patient and share grace, truth and love with them at any opportunity I get. However, we must proclaim truth and the truth is Mormonism is untrue and deeply misleading many.

In the following, I will briefly discuss some of the huge issues with the Mormon faith and attach other resources for your own personal study.

#1 – DNA Here is the introduction in the book of Mormon

One came from Jerusalem in 600 B.C., and afterward separated into two nations, known as the Nephites and the Lamanites… After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians.

Here is the first and most detrimental issue of the Mormon faith. In his introduction, Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon faith, said that the inhabitants of North America came from Jerusalem. DNA testing has shown this is absolutely false. Unfortunately for Mormons, DNA has proven that the Native Americans are descendants from Asia. This has been devastating to all Mormon scientists. More Info here.

#2 – Geography/Archaeology The Bible writes of many cities and locations which have been found by archaeologists. In other words, I can go to Jerusalem, Capernaum and Bethlehem. Most cities written of in the Book of Mormon have never been found or accounted for in any other historical texts. Also, there are coins mentioned in the book of Mormon (Alma - shibles, seon etc.) Guess how many of these have been discovered? Zero. Now, what about the Bible? Thousands of shekels have been found (Mark 12:17). Also, Smith writes of a huge battle in the Pearl of Great Price (another Mormon book) that took place on Hill Cumorah which is located in New York. Here, he claims that hundreds of thousands died (Mormon 6:15). However, there has not been one artifact found from this supposedly huge battle. To help you understand what you would find after a battle of this magnitude, this author compare it to the Battle of Gettysburg: click here see part C.

There are also anachronisms. For starters, the book of Mormon says there were horses during the events which took place between 600 B.C. and 421 AD. However, what Joseph Smith didn’t realize when he was making up Mormonism is that horses were not introduced in America around 1492 when Spanish conquistadors brought them over. There are several devastating issues like the translation of the book of Abraham (found here).

#3 – Corrections
Last, but not least, the book of Mormon claimed to be the “most correct of any book” and that if any changes are made from the 1st edition they should be few and only grammatical. Now I know there are different interpretations of "a few". However, there have been nearly 4,000 changes made within the book of Mormon and not all of them are grammatical (found here).

Some examples: Unfortunately when Smith made up Mormonism he wasn't well educated. Here are some excerpts from the first edition of the book of Mormon that have been corrected in later editions.

• in the 1830 edition, read, ". . . Adam and Eve, which was our first parents. . . ." In the 1908 edition it was changed to; "Adam and Eve, who were our first parents. . . ." 
• (subject verb agreement) - "They did not fight against God no more" (double negative) - Thousands more found with a Google search. 

Another strange thing you see in the book of Mormon is that it will go from this middle school type vocabulary to Shakespearian language rather swiftly. These portions of the book of Mormon can be quoted directly from the 1769 revision of the King James Bible. It is clear that Joseph Smith made up his portions of the book of Mormon then plagiarized others directly from the Bible.

Now to be fair I probably have some grammatical errors in this blog; however, I am not claiming that this blog is inspired either..

There are key facts of the book of Mormon that have been changed. For example, a king is dead in chapter 6 of Mosiah then alive in chapter 21. But then in a later edition of the book of Mormom, the death of this king is chapter 6 is no longer there. I would deem this outside of the category of a “few grammatical changes”. (More found here)

In conclusion, let me restate that I love all people and I would share my issues with Mormonism with any Mormon with love and respect (1 Peter 3:15). However, I do believe they are extremely misled and are following a false religion that will lead them to eternal separation from God.

I pray that I would understand God’s Word more as I grow older and that I would fight the rest of my life to represent His Son more and more in my daily life.

Great podcast where I got all this information here. (Right click, then click "Save As" to listen)

My name is Jordan Penley and I believe Jesus is the way, the truth and the life and no one gets to the Father except through Him.