Recently, during the debate prep on Thursday, Tim used an objection to things with beginnings needing causes in the property of quantum fields to generate particle-antiparticle pairs seemingly at random with no source. While the obvious response to this is to point out that just because we don't observe the cause doesn't mean there isn't one, and this effect is still contingent on the properties of the fields themselves. However, this led me to think about this effect and how the naturalist would use this process to explain where stuff comes from. A few important notes. 1. Both the Theist and Atheist are following Ockham's Razor, so the theory with the most post hoc assumptions is worse. 2. In physics it is a well-known principle that the source of the vast majority of physical laws comes from symmetries in the universe. 3. One common theory for the Big Bang is that the massive energy condensed into particle anti particle pairs in a process called creation or pair production. 4. The way this process doesn't violate the conservation of energy on normal scales is that the particles and antiparticles annihilate each other. One might ask if these particles always annihilate each other how could the universe come about. The answer is this: In our universe where basically all of the fundamental laws of physics are derived from symmetry we have one absolutely necessary violation of this called CP violation. This causes the decays of Kaons to slightly favor matter to antimatter. The physics itself is not as important as the asymmetry. If the naturalist is to attempt to impose a simple mechanism for the structure of the laws then they would be most reasonable to choose symmetry as this mechanism. To account for this effect they would also need to create an arbitrary limit to this mechanism and establish an asymmetry. This shows that not only are the constants (like the tuning pegs on a guitar) are finely tuned for life and existence, but the underlying structure (the guitar itself) is also finely tuned.

I’ve noticed that Muslims are going around with a silly objection lately. But sadly, it’s trapping a lot of Christians. I’ll share the objection here in hopes that we can workshop how to exegete the solution the VERY manufactured problem. The objection: Jesus says He will not drink of the “fruit of the vine” until the eschaton, but then later drinks wine. Matthew 26:29 “I tell you, I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” John 19:28–30 Jesus, on the cross, is given sour wine, which he tastes/drinks. The basic inference line 1. If Jesus vows to not do X, and then later does X, then he broke his vow 2. Jesus vows to not drink the fruit of the vine (Matthew verse) 3. Jesus drinks sour wine which is from grapes still (John) 4. Therefore Jesus broke his Vow Looking forward to your thoughts guys!

It's been a long time coming, but we finally got none other than Dr. Joshua Sijuwade himself giving us a PRIVATE, never-before-seen lecture on how trinitarianism is true monotheism. This will be taking place at 6 AM PST on Thursday this week (April 23). This will be early for some of you, and perfect for others. Hope to see you there.

If you only had 30 minutes in a class of 5th-8th graders, what is one single Resurrection of Jesus data point that you would demonstrate toward high probability for Resurrection Theory? I'm teaching two classes this Sunday and I only have 30 minutes for both (at best. Gotta take those rascals outside, after all!). I'm using Notebook LM to gather all my sources into a slide deck, but I already know I'm someone to go on a tangent, as I am doing right now! On a related note, I was thinking about discussing one of Wes Huff's infographics as his content is stellar. Would love your various input. Thanks in advance.

I used to be able to read on my own but these damn phones got me good. Anyone down to start like a book club or sumn? We can do more than just books maybe but I wanna read more and I need accountability partners if I’m being honest. Any takers? Even just one. 🧍🏾‍♀️