The Case for Faith

1.Kreeft distinguishes between three types of evil: moral evil (caused by human choices), natural evil (earthquakes, disease), and what he calls the 'evil of loss.' How does each type challenge the existence of a good God differently, and do you find his distinctions helpful or overly academic?

1.Craig argues that the objection 'miracles are impossible' often smuggles in a philosophical assumption — namely, naturalism (the belief that nature is all there is) — and then presents it as a scientific conclusion. Can you explain that distinction in your own words? Why does it matter?

1.Bradley is an engineer and materials scientist, not a theologian. Why does Strobel choose a scientist rather than a philosopher or pastor to address this objection? What does that choice say about how Strobel thinks this question should be engaged?

1.What specific Old Testament passages does Strobel identify as most troubling — both to himself and to the skeptics he has encountered? Which of those passages do you find most difficult to read with a clear conscience?

1.Zacharias opens by noting that every major world religion makes exclusive truth claims — not just Christianity. How does that observation reframe the charge of Christian 'arrogance,' and what does it tell us about the nature of religious truth claims in general?

1.Moreland argues that hell is not primarily a place of physical torture that God inflicts on people, but rather the end result of a person's own freely chosen trajectory away from God — a condition of utter God-forsakenness that is, in a sense, what people have been choosing all along. How does that reframing change the emotional and moral weight of the doctrine for you?

1.Woodbridge does not minimize the church's historical atrocities — he names them plainly. Why is intellectual honesty about the church's failures important for apologetics? What happens when Christians either dismiss or over-explain these sins?

1.Strobel profiles people who describe faith not as something they argued their way into, but as something that grew (or collapsed) through experience, community, and spiritual practice. How does that story sit alongside the more evidential, argumentative approach of the book's earlier chapters? Are they in tension?

1.Strobel's conclusion is personal — he reflects on his own experience of moving from intellectual persuasion to life-transforming commitment. What does he identify as the gap between believing the arguments and actually trusting Christ? Have you experienced that gap yourself?

1.Looking back across all eight objections, which one had the greatest personal impact on you — either because it addressed a doubt you'd carried for a long time, or because it opened a question you hadn't fully considered before? What made it land so powerfully?