How to Handle Objections to Scripture

How to Handle Objections to Scripture | Preparing the Crucible

INTRO

Greetings, and welcome to — The Wisdom Crucible with Jakob McClain — where you and I engage in the ongoing practice of applying biblical thinking to deepen our understanding of biblical truth.

This is Episode 0 of Questions in the Crucible — an introduction to how I engage skeptical questions and objections to the Bible and to a Biblical worldview.

I don’t have answers for every question that can be asked about Scripture. I’m sure that you don’t either, but I am convinced that there is an answer for every question, because I’m convinced that the Bible is God’s Word, and it tells us that God is omniscient — or all-knowing.

That means there is no objection or question that Christians have to fear. At worst, there are arguments we haven’t yet thought through.

In this opening episode, I want to lay out the method beneath this ministry:

• how to discern the strong arguments from noisy arguments that merely sound strong,
• how slowing the pace of thought reveals the details that actually matter,
• how to withstand the swarm of “What about…?” objections that often flood theological spaces online,
• and how to remain steady even when someone speaks with impressive confidence but little substance.

In Scripture, wisdom stands at the crossroads and calls out, not with fury, but with calm firmness to illuminate the path. Beginning with the method is, in a sense, beginning with wisdom itself.

Wisdom is the way.

This episode serves a dual purpose: to give you a simple framework for approaching skepticism and doubt with clarity, and to offer a transparent view of the approach I’ll use throughout the rest of this series.

OVERVIEW

Let’s start with an overview. When people encounter a difficult question — such as alleged contradictions, philosophical quandaries, or moral objections — they bring whatever habits they’ve already learned. Some habits promote clarity. Other habits amplify confusion.

Certain rhetorical habits and tactics can shake people’s confidence, even when the foundation of the argument is weak. These tactics are powerful for eliciting emotional reactions, but poor for revealing genuine truth. Identifying such habits and tactics can help us to recognize and disarm them when encountered in action.

RHETORICAL TACTICS OF OBJECTORS

Let’s think through some of them together. As we do, be sure to remember that this is not an exhaustive list, and this discussion is not meant to insult you if you’ve ever been guilty of any of these mistakes. Live, learn, move on and try to do better.

The first tactic that comes to my mind is rapid-fire objections, also called shotgun skepticism: A person launches a barrage of 5, 10, 20+ objections in a row — What about this verse? What about the contradiction? What about that atrocity? What about this doctrine?

The effect isn’t clarity. It’s overload — whether that was the intention or not. If you can’t answer all 20 questions on the spot, you lose, and they claim victory. That’s not how honest debate works.

Ad hominem attacks involve tactics such as calling people by offensive names or slandering their character or intelligence to discredit their witness rather than dealing with the logic of the evidence.

Some examples could be: Christians are bigots. You’re not qualified to make that argument. What do you know?!

Labeling people does nothing to prove their arguments false or to prove the counterargument true. It’s merely a savagely uncivilized attempt to intimidate a person into silence.

Misuse of evidence divorced from context: Verses or phrases ripped from their covenant setting, book, paragraph, and sometimes even from within their own sentences.

This often occurs when people quote one Bible verse to claim contradiction with another verse, but fail to understand or explain the context of the verses before or after, which often clarifies the issue. Any book can sound incoherent and contradictory if you isolate bits and pieces of it without reading the whole text.

Leaning on the exact wording of a particular translation can be hazardous too, because your interpretation may hinge on a particular connotation or definition of a word that has more than one possible interpretation. Other good and valid translations may use slightly different wording, so when you read scripture within its context and compare trustworthy alternative translations you may find yourself drawn to an entirely different conclusion than the one you started with.

Even confidence can mask weak logic. A loud voice, quick speech, and emphatic hand gestures are not the same as a sound argument.

Paul the Apostle was not known to be a boisterous speaker. In 1 Corinthians 2 he says that he came to the people, not with eloquent speech, human wisdom, or persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Holy Spirit’s power, so that their faith would not be in him, in human wisdom, but in God. Never substitute confidence for carefulness.

Appealing to human authority: This famous scholar agrees with me. This big-time YouTuber says the same. Matt Dillahunty said so!

The opinions of those perceived to have authority do not replace reasons. Truth is not dictated by volume, popularity, license, or degree. Your only way around this is to argue against the existence of absolute truth itself. That conclusion defeats its own argument. Good luck inventing proof that truth doesn’t exist.

Straw-manning an argument is when a person crafts a weak form of that argument by leaving out any strong evidence or explanations and simplifying the description so that it is easily dismantled.

When you see any of the aforementioned strategies, slow down and ask yourself — What is the actual question? What is the actual claim? Then you can think more clearly about the Scriptures and your response.

The purpose of Questions in the Crucible is not to dodge strong objections, or to create straw-man arguments whose defeat is all but meaningless, but to bring your toughest questions into the open, to analyze them in the light of Scripture, and to forge a response through understanding that helps us grow in wisdom.

This series is my attempt to use steel-man arguments to foster iron-clad faith through beneficial responses, because even steel can be melted in a sufficiently prepared crucible.

THE POSTURE

Because intelligent skeptics and confused Christians exist, shallow soundbites are not sufficient. This isn’t a ‘gotcha’ channel. This is a thoughtful ministry.

Let’s now discuss how to address skepticism. To begin, here are 3 ideas to keep in mind for Christians dealing with tough questions:

First, be confident in God’s character and His Word. If Scripture is breathed out by God, as stated in 2 Timothy 3:16, then our trust in it comes from our trust in the all-powerful and all-knowing sovereign God of all creation who proved His love for us most brilliantly through Jesus Christ.

Second, have humility for your limited understanding. The problem is never in the Scriptures — sometimes in the translation — but most often in our assumptions, our limited information, and our impatience for omniscience.

Third, be committed to honesty. If a question challenges you, admit it. If an argument has real weight behind it, I’ll admit it too before I attempt to answer it.

Proverbs 2:4 describes wisdom as a hidden treasure. That implies that it takes effort to acquire — effort that you have to be willing to provide. I can’t do that for you. No one can.

If the only effort you give is in listening to my response or copying and pasting my answers, you won’t gain nearly as much as you will by thinking through the issues for yourself as well — so as much as this isn’t a ‘gotcha’ channel, it’s also not meant to replace your own thinking or decision making.

It's not wise to blindly trust in anyone. No matter how brilliant the man, he is still just a man.

THE PROCESS

Now, finally, for the actual process of responding. Because I am not planning to do live Q&As, this process assumes ample time for thorough analysis.

Quicker answers can work in daily conversations. If that’s what you need to see modeled, Mike Winger’s Q&A series is a great place to learn how to think biblically and deliver answers on the fly to questions read for the first time in real time — that’s not to make light of the more detailed responses that he provides for the few questions that he prepares for ahead of time.

The last thing to understand before listing the steps is that this process is influenced by the presupposition of a biblical worldview, which requires biblical thinking as the foundation for all thought.

That said, let’s explore the process, beginning with a summary of steps:

• Clarify the question
• Check presuppositions and assumptions
• Engage with the emotional shadow of the objector
• Steel-man the objection
• Study the biblical context
• Respond theologically, not merely logically or emotionally
• Acknowledge the presence and implications of any remaining uncertainty

Now, let’s walk back through those step-wise to develop a better understanding of this process.

Step 1: Clarify the question.

What is really being claimed? What would actually follow if it were true? How could the answer change a person’s theology or worldview?

If possible, write the question in your own words with clarity, accuracy, and precision. Then, if you can, restate the question to the objector as you understand it so that they have the opportunity to clarify further if they believe you have misunderstood anything.

Step 2: Check presuppositions and assumptions.

Ask the following question: What worldview, expectations, or definitions shape the question?

If a person is asking a moral question, such as how can an all-powerful God be so cruel as to allow suffering, one needs to address the presupposition that God determines morality, because this question assumes that God can be immoral.

Step 3: Engage with the emotional shadow behind the objector.

Is there pain, fear, or lived experience behind the objection? Often, the catalyst for doubt may be past trauma or anxiety regarding the future. If that seems plausible from the presentation of the question, then you should address it.

Emotion doesn’t add validity to objections against God, but it does create a heavy burden on people that is hard to lift with intellectual methods.

God is not the cause of evil or church hurt. Poor use of free will by created beings is.

Step 4: Steel-man the objection.

Don’t create a straw-man out of your opponent — a lazy caricature of the argument.

Let me offer a simple example related to health and exercise. Summary of original claim: Regular moderate exercise is important for long-term health.

Steel-man argument: So, your point is that consistent performance of moderate physical activity 3-7 times per week, tailored to a person’s ability, significantly improves health outcomes, even if the exercise intensity is not extremely high?

This is a strong argument in that it’s evidence-based and easily defensible. It’s a fair argument.

Straw-man argument: So, you’re saying that everyone has to become a muscle-bound gym-rat to avoid an early grave?

This is not a strong argument or a fair representation of the original claim. No one is impressed by the straw-man, and no one cares how you respond to it.

When responding to a question — whether about God, the Bible, a biblical worldview, or anything else — consider posturing yourself on the same side as the objector, and do the work to build a version of the argument that a careful opponent would recognize as fair.

You want the honest objectioner to hear you restate their question and feel understood because you’ve built up the argument rather than tearing it down right from the start.

The bigger they are, the harder they fall. Just remember that it’s the objection that you want to fall as you lift the person up by offering them truth and wisdom.

This is a posture that Jesus demonstrated well through His willingness to stand firm as His enemies raised stones of anger and confusion.

Don’t merely consider the objection. Consider the person and their need for the truth of their Creator and Savior. Let the stones come. Friction against stone sharpens the cutting edge of the mind.

Step 5: Study the biblical context.

Consider not only the immediate context of the verse, but the entire passage, book, and whole-Bible context. If the objection is about a specific verse, that’s obviously where your focus will be.

However, if the objection relates to a general philosophical idea or a major recurrent theme, you may need to more thoroughly explore multiple passages of Scripture or think about the implications of multiple teachings.

If you spend all of your time in one passage when there are ten others that address that same topic, there will be people who will hold that against you, even if your response is otherwise stellar and unimpeachable.

For the once-and-for-all response, make sure that you at least address the immediate context as well as any particular distant context that is likely to be brought up in a what-about-this question.

Step 6: Respond appropriately.

That means that you respond fully and theologically, not merely linguistically. A purely linguistic answer focuses on elements such as: definitions of a word, grammar of a verse, semantics of a phrase, mechanics of a translation.

These answers explain the language, but not so much God Himself, which is immensely more important because the more you understand God, the less burdened you’ll be by any remaining uncertainty — because uncertainty does not constitute proof. Let what can be proven suffice to sustain hope for what cannot.

A theological response seeks to answer the deeper questions: Who is God? What does His character require of Him? What are God’s purposes? How does this issue fit within the context of the entire Bible? What are the implications of this for my beliefs? What are the implications of this for the Church?

Likely more often than not, you will find the barrier between a person and God to be one built on a heart issue rather than a head issue. Theological answers more directly address the heart’s needs than a linguistic explanation.

Linguistic understanding matters, but theological understanding matters infinitely more. Words carry truth for transformation.

Step 7: Acknowledge the presence and implications of any remaining uncertainty.

If any part of the question remains unresolved, name it honestly. Explain why the difficulty of comprehending or explaining does not equal contradiction or proof for the objection, and give a clear reminder that trusting God where complete knowledge is withheld is a valid and appropriate exercise of faith.

Explore the implications of any remaining uncertainty. How is your worldview affected by the remaining uncertainty? Is there a way to discover the answer by human means, or is it a situation where only God knows?

LOOKING FORWARD

Those 7 steps are the framework of the method that I’ll be applying going forward to all Questions in the Crucible.

The following episodes will serve as a demonstration of the practical application of everything discussed in this episode. My hope is that as you walk through the questions with me, you will see not only the answer to those questions, but the method of handling most any question about the Bible.

OUTRO

My goal is not to defeat skeptics, but to show people that the weight of a question is not in the question itself, but in the response it receives from us.

For all of us, there are many questions that will never be answered in this life. I’m content with that, because I know that unanswered questions do not equal evidence.

As the creation, I don’t have need or right to demand an explanation of every thought and action of my Creator. He is the Omniscient One. I’m merely a man — one who wants to offer beneficial responses to some of the objections, doubts, and fears — to help other people see the evidential truth of the Bible — that it’s not a tangle of contradictions, that God is the source of all truth, and that there is comfort written into the scriptures for the questions that remain unanswered.

It’s good to be able to answer many questions, but having questions about things that we can’t know is also valuable so that we can learn to trust in what we can’t see because of what we can see.

In 2 Timothy 1:12 Paul says, I know Whom I have believed. That is the foundation of faith — not what you believe, but Whom you believe.

When a parent tells a child that they love them, they are believed because they are known.

Get to know your Heavenly Father, and you will learn to trust Him when He tells you that He loves you and when He withholds the answer to provide an opportunity to exercise your faith — because He has already proven Himself — over, and over, and over again.

Questions are welcome here. If you have skeptical questions or doubts, you’re welcome to offer them. I’m grateful for the opportunity to walk through them with you.

If you’d like future episodes to meet you automatically, you can follow this podcast wherever you listen.

May the LORD bless you, and may you begin to recognize how blessed you are.