Evangelism

Southern Seminary’s Dr. Andrew Walker has established himself as a leading voice in Christian culture – an unafraid, unapologetic evangelist. He doesn’t mince his words when helping the faithful interpret the muddied and often heretical pronouncements of those who might claim Christianity but are either deliberately or ignorantly confused about it.

Writing in the Daily Wire earlier this week, Walker critiqued a recent column from David French, a New York Times columnist. It’s always a challenge to get inside a writer’s head and impossible to know what’s in their heart. But there’s enough of French’s weekly words to identify a pattern and propose a premise.

Walker writes:

Walker, who serves as Associate Dean in the School of Theology and Associate Professor of Christian Ethics and Public Theology at Southern Seminary, concluded his essay with his trademark clarity and practical teaching touch:

It’s too bad that Andrew Walker’s words are only being published in the Daily Wire and not the Old Grey Lady. Readers of the 174-year-old newspaper are regularly subjected to distorted perspectives of Christianity. They would be much better served if Andrew Walker was given a column.

But why is progressive Christianity not Christianity? To put it simply, those who subscribe to it are abandoning historic Christian doctrine and replacing it with a more culturally friendly interpretation of long-established truths.

At the foundation of progressive Christianity is the reinterpretation and recasting of Scripture. To the progressive, it’s akin to a political liberal’s belief in a “living and breathing” Constitution. In this distorted and tragic worldview, God’s Word is not inspired or authoritative if it conflicts with or contradicts modern sensibilities.

As soon as you reject or wobble on the authority of Scripture, everything else is up for debate and amendment. I once had a Presbyterian pastor friend tell me that he knew many pastors of very large churches in the libera; Presbyterian Church (USA) denomination who didn’t believe in the bodily resurrection of Jesus. They chose to focus on the teachings of Jesus they liked and ignored what they didn’t.

Progressive Christianity distorts God’s sacred and holy Word and contorts itself in trying to justify everything from abortion to same-sex “marriage” to the false but feel-good belief that “all roads” somehow lead to eternal life.

The late Dr. Adrian Rogers, who served as president of the Southern Baptist Convention three times, was credited with helping lead the “conservative resurgence” of the denomination. Warning against what he believed to be theological liberalism, he often said the Christian faith faced its most serious threat from within.

“I believe the greatest enemy of the Bible is the so‑called Christian who simply ignores the Bible or disregards it,” he once said.

Andrew Walker never served with Dr. Rogers, but he knows the history and admires the principled stand that he and others took to resist tragic, theological drift. Reflecting on it, Walker wrote:

Andrew Walker wrote those words in 2014 – and still believes and lives them in 2026.

Photo credit: Southern Seminary

A new documentary film explores some of mankind’s most important scientific discoveries – and the “intentional design” seen throughout nature.

The movie, The Story of Everything: The Science That Reveals a Mind Behind The Universe, is designed to be a “cinematic exploration of the cosmos that reveals the hidden hand behind our universe.”

A synopsis of the documentary states,

The movie, which runs for 2 hours and 22 minutes, features numerous notable scientists, mathematicians, cosmologists, physicists and entrepreneurs, including:

• Dr. Stephen C. Meyer, director of the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture
• Dr. John Lennox, professor emeritus of mathematics at Oxford University
• Peter Thiel, co-founder of PayPal
• Dr. Brian Keating, Chancellor’s Distinguished Professor of Physics at the University of California, San Diego
• Dr. David Berlinski, mathematician
• Dr. Jay W. Richards, senior fellow at the Discovery Institute
• Dr. Robert Sheldon, plasma physicist
• Dr. Timothy McGrew, professor of philosophy at Western Michigan University
• Dr. Douglas Axe, Rosa Endowed Chair of Molecular Biology at Biola University
• Dr. Michael Behe, professor of biological sciences at Lehigh University
• Dr. James Tour, T. T. and W.F. Chao Professor of Chemistry at Rice University
• Dr. Frank J. Tipler, cosmologist and professor of mathematical physics at Tulane University
• Dr. Bijan Nemati, physicist
• Dr. Sarah Salviander, astrophysicist
• Dr. William A. Dembski, mathematician and philosopher
• Dr. Richard Sternberg, evolutionary biologist
• Dr. Casey Luskin, geologist
• Dr. Michael Newton Keas, historian of science

You can watch a trailer for the film below:

The Story of Everything is sure to challenge many individuals’ conception of what “modern scientists” believe – particularly in the fields of cosmology and biology.

For decades, many cosmologists maintained that our universe is eternal – eliminating any need for an explanation of how the universe began. As Carl Sagan put it in his 1980s Cosmos television series, “The Cosmos is all that is or was or ever will be.”

Furthermore, many biologists asserted that all life evolved from purely undirected, unguided, natural processes that occurred over time through natural selection and random genetic mutation. This theory, the “Neo-Darwinian Synthesis,” emerged from the synthesis of Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection proposed in On the Origin of Species and Mendelian genetics.

But there’s a problem. It’s increasingly clear that our universe is not eternal, and that life could not have emerged from undirected, unguided evolutionary processes.

In 1925, astrophysicist Gerges Lemaître began proposing that the universe began in a “big bang” creation event.

His discovery has been confirmed by Edwin Hubble’s discovery in 1929 that the universe is expanding; and Arno Penzias and Robert Wilscon’s detection of Cosmic Microwave Background radiation left over from a creation event.

This raises the question: What – or Who – caused the universe to come into being?

Additionally, cosmologists have realized that many laws of nature are precisely fine-tuned for life. These physical constants are so precise that if they were altered only a miniscule amount, it would be impossible for life to exist at all.

As English astronomer Fred Hoyle asserted, “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature.”

Furthermore, modern biologists have discovered that many life forms – like the common monarch butterfly to the plentiful honeybee – are intelligently designed for life with body plans and enzymes that could not have emerged from purely random, natural processes.

As molecular biologist Dr. Douglas Axe put it, “The failure of Darwin’s explanation of life is a commonsense fact – a plain truth testified to by our strong intuition that life is designed.”

In his book River Out of Eden, atheist biologist Richard Dawkins argued, “The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.”

Dawkins’ assertion is increasingly out-of-step with the findings of modern science – especially in the fields of cosmology and biology.

It may be difficult for modern skeptics to explain the universe’s appearance of design. The same is not true for the average Christian.

The Story of Everything is distributed by Fathom Entertainment and appears in theaters April 30.

Former atheist Lee Strobel recently appeared on an episode of Focus on the Family with Jim Daly, explaining how science points to the existence of a divine Creator. You can listen to the episode, “Evidence for the Existence of God.”

You can also read Strobel’s most recent book, Is God Real?: Exploring The Ultimate Question of Life.

To speak with a family help specialist or request resources, please call us at 1-800-A-FAMILY (232-6459).

Related articles and resources:

Plugged In

Return of The God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries That Reveal The Mind Behind The Universe

The Case for Miracles: A Journalist Investigate Evidence for The Supernatural

John Lennox: Evangelism with Gentleness and Respect

NASA’s Webb Telescope Confirms Christian Belief: The Universe Had a Beginning

Leading Scientist: The Universe Points to the Existence of God

Exclusive: Christian Philosopher William Lane Craig Responds to Hawk Nelson Singer’s Leaving Christianity

Photo from The Story of Everything.

Gen Z is the least religious cohort in American history. 43% of this generation born roughly between 1996 and 2012 identify as religious “nones.” While there have been many reports since Charlie Kirk’s assassination indicating increased interest in religion and increased church attendance, according to statistician Ryan Burge, there is not yet statistical evidence of religious revival among young people.

There is, however, ample evidence that these Zoomers are looking for meaning and willing to reconsider religion. Specifically, though these trends may not be large enough to be captured in statistics, there seems to be a growing interest in more rigorous forms of faith.

In a recent article in Tablet magazine, Ani Wilcenski, a Zoomer herself, examined this phenomenon. While acknowledging that Gen Z is less religious than previous generations, Wilcenski, researched those bucking that trend, including converts to Islam, Jews who are becoming more observant, Latin Mass Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and others who are joining stricter, more traditional religious groups.

According to Wilcenski, Gen Z has been raised with the “illusion of infinite horizons,” and grew up “without sturdy institutions or fulfilling rites of passage.” As a result, for this generation, “[e]verything—career, identity, relationships—unfolds as a series of self-directed experiments,” something that has been labeled “liquid modernity.” Sociologist Zygmunt Bauman coined that phrase to describe the experience of life as unstable and non-permanent, without fixed distinctions, and no foundation for cultivating identity.

The experience of “liquid modernity” is why, according to Wilcenski, the ideological capture of Gen Z has been so comprehensive. For example, nearly one-quarter of the generation identify as LGBTQ, up nearly 20 points from previous generations. Ideology gives the illusion of a solid cause and offers a purpose for life where otherwise there is none.

Of course, that is the role religion traditionally played in Western culture. As Wilcenski noted, the draw of religion is that it provides a firm source of virtue and belonging, focus, and a sense of permanence. That’s what the Zoomers who are exploring more demanding forms of faith are most likely seeking.

As Wilcenski put it,

These faiths don’t adapt to the age—they expect the age to conform to them. Their rituals inconvenience, their authorities override preference, their truths don’t negotiate. And in a society allergic to absolutes, that refusal to dilute themselves holds a powerful magnetism.

As an example, Wilcenski quoted a 23-year-old woman who explained her decision to join a Carmelite monastery in Plough magazine: “I figured if I was going to do something crazy for our Lord I might as well go all in.” Like Wilcenski, the Plough article noted that young women who join strict religious orders are committing to something stable and permanent.

According to Wilcenski, when the Gen Zers turning to religion offer reasons why, they

sound more like escapes from modern chaos than declarations of faith…. [T]heir newfound religiosity is less about belief than about orienting life around something ultimate—something greater than the self.

That, of course, also leaves them vulnerable to religious falsehoods. Remember, Wilcenski not only researched conversions to Christianity but also to conservative forms of Judaism and Islam. The desire to escape “liquid modernity” says nothing about the genuineness of any faith that follows. The same motivation can explain the growing number of young men who are embracing political extremism, from Antifa to white nationalism.

It has long been the case that laxer forms of religion have declined while more demanding forms have grown or at least declined more slowly. The divide within this segment of Gen Z seems to be even more pronounced. This group will not be interested in churches that accommodate themselves to American culture. The seeker-sensitive model will not work. It probably never has.

The Church must be countercultural, unapologetic about even the weird things we believe, and unafraid to ask for serious commitment from people. It needs to explore the depths of the Gospel; it must explain life and its meaning, including hard truths about the human condition, rather than offer only shallow therapeutic or pragmatic applications. A church that does this will not only be able to counter destructive ideologies vying for all generations but will also be able to offer meaning and stability to a generation that is looking for both.