Thursday, August 30, 2012

Analyzing Apologists: Interview with Chad Williams, Former Navy Seal and Author of "Seal of God"

Hey everyone, as I mentioned in a previous post, I want to start interviewing different apologists. We have the opportunity to hear from the author of "Seal of God" for this first installment! If you read my about page you will see that his book was the one that helped spark my desire for apologetics. I'm  grateful to Chad for taking time out of his busy schedule to answer a few of my questions. Read the interview, check out some of his websites and be sure to purchase his book.                                                                                                                        1. When you were on the teams, what was the toughest thing you had to deal with in regards to being a Christian/ SEAL, without one role over-powering the other?

The toughest thing I had to deal with was the friction that occurred between some old buddies and myself after I had died to my old self (2 Corinthians 5:17; Col. 3:3). It has been said that, "the same sun that melts wax, hardens the clay." Any new believer can expect to see such a melting and hardening process occur early on in their spear of influence if you choose to be that sun -- which is to be a light just as Jesus calls us to be in Matthew 5:16, "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven." You see, sometimes other men encounter Christian light that ultimately has a melting effect on their heart, as they are convicted of their own sin -- by the work of the Holy Spirit-- and brought into a state where they are bowing the knee before the Creator as-it-were and glorifying God. Other times you let your light shine and it has a different result, a hardening effect. Lets not forget about the flip-side of light. As Jesus puts it in John 3:19-20: "And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed." In such a case, you may be a radiant light that makes men living in the darkness of their sin feel uncomfortable around you…It hardens them toward God and toward you! That is the toughest thing I had to deal with while being a Christian in the SEAL teams...being marginalized at times for aligning myself with Jesus as Lord which resulted in some division between myself and comrades stuck in the old ways of living. Misery loves company, and so sometimes they would rather you turn that light off or put it under a basket (Matthew 5:15a).

2. How did/do you deal with these struggles?
I deal with this difficulty by having a "knowing mind" as John MacArthur might put it. James1:2-4 tells us, "My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials,  knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience.  But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking nothing." I knew that God was at work and intimately aware of my situation. I knew He was present in the midst of my struggles and He had a purpose in allowing it. Ultimately, I knew I would become a more mature Christian (that God would get greater use out of me) if I endured. "But He knows the way that I take; when He has tested me, I shall come forth as gold" (Job 23:10).  

3. What advice do you have for current active duty or any other veteran?
Don't just be a soldier for your country but be a soldier for Christ (2 Timothy 2:3-5). Jesus tells us to let our light shine before men, so do the work of an evangelist by being a radiant light that not only shines but communicates the life saving message of the Gospel (Matthew 5:16; Matthew 28:18-20; Romans 1:16; Romans 10:14-17). Charles Studd once wrote, "Only one life, ’twill soon be past, only what’s done for Christ will last. And when I am dying, how happy I’ll be, if the lamp of my life has been burned out for Thee.”

4. Where else can we find you?
Chad Williams Blog:
Twitter: @rationaltruth
Youtube: Rational Responder
Request Chad as Speaker:
Purchase his book: Seal of God

Chad Williams is a former Navy SEAL, having served his country proudly from 2004-2010. Now engaged in full-time ministry work, Chad uses the training and experience he gained as a SEAL to help communicate the Gospel to others. Chad and his wife, Aubrey, live in Huntington Beach, California and they are expecting their first child, a baby girl, and will be naming her Ella. 

Monday, August 27, 2012

Monkey Business

Hey guys! So this particular post is going away from the previous post series I started but this subject I will write on is something that has, for the second day in a row, been coming up in my life. Yesterday after church, a fellow brother in Christ was asking me about how to refute, or argue the evolutionary stance. Then today, in my Religion and Values class we had to briefly write up arguments based off a video between Richard Dawkins and John Mackay. So, this is my “in a nutshell” argument and defense against evolution. You will see I only addressed the main arguments presented in the videos an, but like everything, it leads back to an issue of their heart and what they were pre-supposed to. If you have any additions to this, or have found a specific argument or tactic that would help others out, please post away! I would also love to hear your thoughts.

Below is my response to the question in my class Evolutionary Theory vs. Creationism, from this video:

This is actually really quite remarkable, that we are beginning this class with talking about the Evolutionary theory vs. Creationism as I was just discussing it this week to a friend of mine. The videos you posted were very helpful in seeing the two different sides to the arguments, but one thing I believe we need to take into account, however, is both Dawkins and Mackay's worldview and belief in a "higher power." They are both presupposed to their own beliefs, hence drives what they believe and why they believe it. Because of this, neither one of them are coming into this debate as a "neutral" party. Dawkins is a self-confessed atheist while Mackay is a self-proclaimed, protestant Christian. Both of them are coming into this with their own beliefs that they were raised to believe, and also somewhat of an understanding on what the other believes.

The argument is focused mainly around whether or not evolution is able to be observed. Now with evolution, we have two different formulas that you can look at which is gradualism and punctuated equilibrium. Gradualism is the belief that things and beings tend to change or evolve gradually over a period of time in which it should be observable. Punctuated equilibrium basically says that these mutations rely on a specific instance of unique circumstances. A good example is that the world became engulfed underwater and us humans began to evolve into humans with lungs. Now one thing I would have to say on the observation of evolution (and Dawkins admits it as well) is that it is unobservable. Mackay then pins him to that statement which then contradicts evolution as factual, instead of a theory. Dawkins then responds with saying you can't see electrons etc... However, we can run tests and diagnostics in which we can see the atoms, electrons, and other substances un-observable to our eyes. Now let’s look at fossils, which most evolutionists use to support their theory (note that we have not noticed any change in the fossils.) The only thing that fossils could support is the punctuated equilibrium; well, this is a no-brainer. So if we looked at a fossil or a greyhound, and then today we were to mate a greyhound with a Chihuahua, would that dogs fossils not look a lot different than a pure-bred greyhound? So yes, we have seen change in cross-mating species and such, but eventually, if those species were to continue down with mating with each other they would become inbreed, and eventually die out.
   The underlying issue with this argument is that by being in a believer of the Theory of Evolution (which is just that a theory not factual) you ultimately believe in naturalism. Naturalism is the belief that nothing exists outside the means of this universe, or that it does not affect the universe. This belief means that there is no God, that we humans happened by chance, and everything we see is of no consequence to what we do. With this, I would then respond to someone who claims all of the above with three premises using logical syllogism, that argues if naturalism is in fact true than objective moral values do not exist.

1. If objective moral values do not exist, then God does not exist.
2. Objective moral values do exist.
3. Therefore God exists.

 Objective moral values are something that is understandably morally wrong, such as rape, or child molestation. As a naturalist, you are saying that everyone holds their own truth and values within themselves given by nature. If that is indeed true, then that would mean if I were a serial killer and I see no problem with murdering people, according to you that is ok because that is what my inner conscience is saying is correct. However, if you agree that rape, murder, or child molestation is in fact wrong, then you are agreeing with my second premise that objective moral values do exist. And if objective moral values do exist, therefore God exists and is the reason for our nature and our world.

I apologize if I went a little long, however this is a very tough nut to crack in just a few short paragraphs online. Whether you agree or disagree, please comment below and let me know your thoughts.

Wednesday, August 22, 2012



Ok, so were not physically under attack like in the movie Red Dawn where Russians invade the United States by sending in paratroopers. However, what we’re facing is just as dangerous if not more so, with what is infiltrating our church and more specifically, our youth. You are probably wondering what I am referring to, and that is the "love wins" mentality along with experiential books that are corrupting and polluting our minds. What are these books and what are you talking about? There are multitudes of books out there that I am referring to by authors such as Rob Bell, Brian McLaren, Dan Kimball, Bill Dahl, and Tony Jones. This list could go on and on, and chances are you may own one of these books by either one of the above authors or by one I didn’t list. The question you need to ask yourself is: what is wrong with these books? While most of the books do promote a form of "godliness" and definitely are self-help, they are NOT rooted in the truths of the Bible. When books focus more on what truth is to us or are hinting that the Bible does not provide a clear cut black and white look on life, warning bells should be ringing! What I am describing to you is deconstructionism, the idea that there is no single meaning of a passage or a line of text. You may be involved with this already in a small group and don’t even realize it is happening. It would look something like this: "Let's read a passage from Scripture: Exodus 20: 1-17, the 10 Commandments." Your small group may read this, and then in a circle “discuss” what this means to you. Some may have the interpretation that murdering in the command, "Thou shalt not murder," literally means killing someone while the other may think something different.  Instead of reading this passage as physical death, someone could say, "I don't believe it's murder if...." which leaves out the Bible as the moral guide. This statement now makes the reader interpret the Scripture to say what he/she wants it to say not what the author intended.  The leader now fails to refer to 1 John 3:15 which states if you hate someone you have committed murder. Why wasn’t this brought up, why are people contextualizing the text to make it say what they want it to say? Well, this deconstructionism leads to the belief that there are no absolute truths, which means things are not black and white but grey. This deconstructionism is different for everyone and their beliefs. Contrary to the writings of the authors above, I am here to tell you that absolute truths do exist and to say otherwise is not Biblical, look at (Deuteronomy 32:4; Isaiah 65:16; John 1:17-18; John 14:6; John 15:26-27; Galatians 2:5).

    I could go on and on pointing out specifics, but instead, let’s look at the correct way to approach Bible studies, small groups, and personal devotion time. The first thing to realize is that the Bible has only one correct interpretation, even though it may apply to several different instances. The deconstructionist would make the passage applicable to the reader, not the author. We need to be aware of the Post-Modern way of thinking (no truth) and consistently return to the Bible. Romans 1:21-22 says, “For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.” Also, to refute the Post-Modern way of thinking lets also look at 1 Corinthians 3:19, "For the wisdom of this world is folly with God. For it is written, 'He catches the wise in their craftiness.'” So now that you have an understanding of what deconstructionism is and this “emergent movement” as they like to call it, you should be on guard with your Bible in hand to back up what ever is being said/taught and if it isn’t in the Bible, it is foolishness.

I will continue to go on in this "Under Attack" series. We have an interview lined up with an overseas missionary, apologist, and Bible translator to get some more sound doctrine on what we are facing. Be sure to check back in a few days. God Bless.


Sunday, August 12, 2012

Welcome to Claim Your Brain


Hey everyone, and welcome to my blog! You're probably wondering what this blog is all about and why should you even bother checking it out. Well, I am no popular apologist, speaker, or anyone nationally recognized but I am someone who truly wants to help other Christians learn more about their faith.

What can I expect? 

Through this blog, my aim is to help you learn how to defend your faith, and while doing so I believe you will develop a better understanding of the Bible and how to relay what you have learned to others. My vision for this blog is to post stories and interactions I have had with people, as well as common misconceptions people have about what being a Christian entails. I will also plan on posting video interviews with other apologists, like myself, and asking them questions about how they overcome certain obstacles with defending their faith.

Who are you?
  I am a sold out believer in Jesus Christ, the Savior of all mankind. While I have not yet received formal Apologetics training, I am an aspiring pastor and cannot wait to begin seminary so I can receive the formal training  I need to enhance my skill-set. I have read countless amounts of books on Apologetics, commentaries, and have been studying in Dr. William Lane Craigs' class The Defenders.

   I really hope you enjoy this blog as much as I enjoy writing it. I really look forward to facilitating questions and hearing stories from all of you all on your journey in your Christian life. I can't wait to hear the opportunities you have had to share the gospel and defend the faith!

For more information on the purpose of this blog and answers to common questions, click around the tabs above.