E-Payne Europe 2017 Final April 29, 2017 Greetings from California! We landed yesterday and slept most of the night. I will include at the beginning our upcoming prayer requests (usually at the end) - then give the update on our final days in Europe. THANK YOU for reading these updates and praying for us, even if you only caught a few. We both felt God’s presence and help in our many conversations and talks. We know what we have done has made a difference for individual students and staff with IFES, and that feels great. We are thankful for good health and two full months of productive work in addition to the talks. (Well, because of the talks which Peter constantly updates and personalizes based on purpose, audience, whether it is translated, etc.) I, Janet, could not believe how hard Peter worked all the way to the end. (I was able to get good work done on our summer camp for Chinese teens in-between talks, but that is another story.) Upcoming: The Month of May: We are looking forward to some time around home and with family. We will be preparing to the summer seminars and camps and for guests all summer, including the student who is living with us, who will stay on till mid-June, and our young friend Ariel (from China), who will stay for a month. Plus, we recorded several of the talks and want to make them available to you - we will figure that out. Prayer: Could you please pray … *for summer prep. *for an update to our website with recordings. *for our student Dani’s family - her mother had emergency brain surgery and is here in Santa Cruz, not home in Washington. *for our UCSC Grad Fellowship. We continue with our Bible study all summer. Update: Our Final Days in Europe Konstanz, Germany On Sunday and Monday, we had some interaction with some of the Konstanz (Constance) Germany SMD students (IFES) a beach BBQ on the shore of Lake Constance. We stayed with a wonderful couple, known and loved by the students for their hospitality and mentoring.

Tuesday April 25 7pm Debate in Konstanz: “Does Morality Need a Foundation in God?” with philosophy professor Jacob Rosenthal. About 70 were in attendance, although Janet sat near the front (so I, Janet, again did not get an audience photo after it started - I was so intensely listening!). Attached is the powerpoint I (Peter) used for my opening 15-minute statement. Prof Rosenthal’s in his opening agreed that there is a need for a foundation for morality but did not give a clear answer as to how such a foundation is to be achieved. (Later in the Q&A he said he hoped that reason could establish such a foundation but was’t certain it could.) His arguments were largely reasons why how thought that God does not constitute a good foundation for morality (see addendum 1 for more)

Liechtenstein (tiny country between Switzerland and Austria) Wed. April 26 10:30 am – 12:30 pm Internationale Akademie für Philosophie (Presentation and interaction on, “Does Morality Need a Foundation in God?”) The morning of the debate I got an invitation to present my ideas from the debate at a small philosophy institute (offering Ph.D.s) that was initially started by the Prince of

Liechtenstein. I had met the director, Daniel von Wachter plus another German philosophy student, Roderich, at Evangelical Philosophical Society meetings in the US. Roderich came to the debate with a friend and drove us to Liechtenstein the next morning.

I presented my opening statement plus reply to the Euthyphro Dilemma) to the small group of Daniel and three others (including Daniel). Daniel then gave some thoughts by way of reply. Lively discussion continued for the next hour and a half. It was a delightful time! (see Addendum 2 for more.)

We had lunch at an Afghan restaurant in Austria! We don’t usually give such details, but it was fun to see just how small Liechtenstein is. In the late afternoon, Daniel was already planning on driving to Zürich, so we were given a ride with him to Zürich for a flight the next day to Stockholm. There we stayed with Gustaf (Credo staff) and family that night and flew home the next day, Friday. Again, thanks so much for your prayers for trips! Peter and Janet Addendum 1: On the Debate: Professor Rosenthal’s arguments against the need for God as the foundation for ethics were a combination of (a) the“Euthyphro Dilemma”, (b) an assertion that moral convictions shouldn’t be based on an authority, (c) the Bible is not a good

foundation because (i) it is too open to varying interpretations about what is moral, (ii) one can never know that it is really God who is speaking, and (iii) the God of the Bible commanded things that seem quite contrary to morality: the command to Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac, and the command to kill all the Canaanites). I wished at that point we had had rebuttal periods. Instead, we each could ask a couple questions to each other. I did have the opportunity to reply to the Euthyphro Dilemma, and I made a couple of comments about the genocide-in-the-Bible objection (not enough) and never got to the Abraham and Isaac objection. Nonetheless, all-in-all the dialogue went well and a couple of people afterwards commented on how they appreciated how well the two of us interacted. (I had a good one-on-one conversation afterwards from a woman student from Romania, a Christian, but who was not yet gotten involved with the SMD there at Konstanz. I connected her with Mirjam, the student who had invited us.) Addendum2: Ontology* of moral facts: (Janet says, prepare yourself for a philosophical “deep talk.”) The most interesting part of the discussion concerned whether moral facts have a reality “out there” in the world as objective facts. The question basically concerns what it is that one is aware of when one, through one’s conscience, feels something to be morally right or wrong. Is one aware of moral facts that exist in the world? *ontology is the study of the nature of being, the nature of the reality of this or that (e.g. of abstract mathematical objects, ideas, persons, the natural world, etc.) Thomas Aquinas, Catholic theologian influenced by Aristotle, embraced the idea that moral right and wrong are part of creation (moral natural law). (Many Protestants have also come to embrace a natural-law view of the status of moral values.) On this view, we are able to perceive what is right and wrong in a way analogous to sensory perception. But note that when Paul speaks of “the law written on the heart,” he is not using perceptual language, e.g. perceiving an act of lying and perceiving in it a negative value. Rather the knowledge that one has, of the law, is already in the person’s possession, written on his/her heart. Continuing with the lying example, Paul’s language is not “perceiving that lying is wrong,” but rather implies only “knowing that lying is wrong.” The latter language is open with respect to where the belief or knowledge comes from. This, of course, leaves open the question, “This knowledge; what is it a knowledge of?” Is it a knowledge of moral values that exist in the world, or is it a knowledge, which at least in part, is a knowledge of what is for the good for human persons. (“Good” here has some objective content for it is true that, given the way human beings are constituted, some things contribute to their sense of enjoyment in and satisfaction with their lives. E.g. Human beings need friendship, etc. to be happy, to flourish. This is an objective fact about human beings, even though it depends on their subjective experiences. I said “at least in part” in speaking of the knowledge that comes from conscience, because such knowledge is more than just an awareness of what will contribute to, or detract from, the welfare of oneself and others. It includes the awareness that one ought to care about the welfare of others. The naturalist might argue that this sense of ought simply comes from our social character as homo sapiens, that humans, through feelings of empathy, will feel guilt about doing harm to others and satisfaction in helping others.* But, I would suggest, that the

“law written on the heart” involves an awareness, even if in a vague way, of something or someone beyond ourselves to whom we are accountable. Thus, even though those who only have the “law written on the heart” nonetheless have some awareness of divine approval and disapproval for various kinds of behaviors or attitudes. If this is the case, then one does not need to suppose that in moral conscience one has perceptions of moral facts that are part of the world, or part of certain kinds of behaviors; rather one can take moral conscience as arising from revelation of God’s will to all human persons. *In the powerpoint I suggest that in this way, the naturalist can get some objective moral right and wrong, but that it is not enough, e.g. our social character doesn’t incline us to care for the welfare of everyone or of everyone equally. One last thought—although Daniel quite firmly disagreed—it seems to me that value of anything is unintelligible apart from its being of value to someone. That someone, of course, can include God. And in the case of moral values, I suggest that, the connection to divine will is essential.

Payne Europe 2017 #13

April 19, 2017 We are in Strasbourg, France (on the German border). We will have some down time at a cheap hotel here until we head on Saturday to Konstanz, Germany (on the Swiss border). It will also be time to finish prep for the debate in Konstanz next Tuesday.

Update: Presence 17 The all-Europe Easter conference finished Monday night. It has been a superb conference! I especially liked the preaching on Jonah by Michael Ramsden (with Ravi Zacharias Ministry; living in Oxford). You will be able to watch video of most of conference plenaries on Youtube at the IFES Europe “channel.” It has been fun seeing so many people that we know - from place we have been to for the last many years. E.g. last Friday we went on a walk to the Johannesburg Castle with the Lithuanian staff and students. On Saturday we had dinner with two of the students we had met in Trondheim, Norway, three years ago. And then there were new people. Janet had a

great conversation with one man from French-speaking Switzerland and another man from Paris. We had a good chat the morning of our departure with Kosta in ministry in Macedonia. He was telling us of new openness amongst Muslims. (Not long agothe highest number of ISIS volunteers relative to population had come from the band of land in Macedonia close to Kosovo and Albania.) Prayer Team Janet was involved in praying with students after the evening talks. She had sweet conversations and prayer with women, all Germans it turns out. Seminar: The Reliability of Scripture (I, Janet writing.) There were seats for 60 people, and most were taken. Peter did a great job. He could have prepared for this without much work, but he chose to engage the challenges offered by Bart Ehrman, a former evangelical turned into hostile critic. Ehrman’s points attacking the Bible are not new, but have drawn a huge audience. Peter is hoping to work further on these for seminars this summer. **Photos show a group of people who hung around until the building closed, walked with Peter to the dinner line (a long line - lots of time to talk) and sat with him. I sat on the next table with some new friends.

Coming up: Tues. Apr. 25 Debate at the U of Konstanz, “Does Morality Need a Foundation in God?” We will join a number of the students for church on Sunday and then look forward to the debate with philosophy professor Jacob Rosenthal. I haven’t been able to find out much about his philosophical orientation on line, but I look forward to getting to know him. Pray that my opening 15 minute statement is clear and concise. I am anticipating that the level of English will be generally good, but it is important that I not speak too fast. Prayer for home: The parents of one of our students at UCSC, Dani, came to visit her before her mom had brain surgery, but she had to have emergency surgery in Santa Cruz. The student in our home offered to have Dani’s family with her until we return (then we will find housing for her dad). Please pray for them: for healing (just found out it is cancer) and for comfort for those coming and going. Dani has major exams in May for her PhD (hopefully delayed). April 27 — We fly to Stockholm from Zürich April 28 — We fly back to the US Thank you again for upholding us for these two months and in our ministry at home! Peter and Janet

Payne Europe 2017 #12

April 14, 2017

Presence 17: Aschaffenburg, Germany

We have been having a great time. Here is a wide-angle photo from the plenary this

morning. My seminar "The Reliability of Scripture is Sunday (Easter) afternoon.

Peter (and Janet)

Payne Europe 2017 #10

Wed. April 5

In Stockholm and Linköping

We have enjoyed staying with Gustaf Thunqvist and family. Gustaf is the Credo (IFES) staff

who has been the one who has arranged our trips here in Sweden. Gustaf and Åsa have

three sons. Tomorrow is the last speaking engagement here in Sweden: Karolinska Institutet

(medical school) on “Science and Christianity.” We then fly to the Netherlands on Friday.

Sun. Apr 2, 4 pm Preaching at New Life Church, “The Case for the Resurrection.”

I was invited to preach (Gustaf translating - it is also translated into Mongolian.) (Janet

adds...)The pastor told the congregation that when he was asked about Peter coming, he

said yes right away because he remembered how much Peter talked with (engaged with)

people last year at the FIKA (snacks after the service).

Mon. Apr 3 noon: KTH (Royal Institute of Technology) “Science and Christianity: Worldviews in

Conflict?”

In the talk I made reference to atheist philosopher Thomas Nagel and summarized his

argument against naturalism from his essay “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?” (See addendum)

In the conclusion. I reasserted that there is good reason to think that naturalism is

false. Two students who are naturalists came up to me afterwards to press me on the

assertion. They both seemed to appreciate my responses to their queries. I was hoping that

they might come back on Tuesday, but I don’t think they did.

Tues. Apr 4 noon: KTH “Does Ethics Need a Foundation in God?”

Again, the interaction in the Q&A was good. I think that at least many saw the difficulty that

the naturalist has in trying to avoid ethical relativism and yet the practical importance of

trying to do so. In the talk I had claimed that it is not logically possible to make a moral

claim and be a cultural moral relativist about the claim. One student came up and

questioning my claim. “Can’t one make a moral claim while still seeing it as relative to

his/her culture?” (See addendum 2)

Wed. Apr 5 noon: U. of Linköping (medical school) “Why Is the World So Unfair?”

This was our first time in Linköping, a two hour train ride southwest of Stockholm. The

Christian student group at the med school there, called "Fisherman’s Friends", had done a

poll two weeks earlier asking students to write down a question they would ask God if they

could. Three were chosen for noon talks this week. Mine basically concerned why God

allows so much injustice and evil. I modified my suffering and evil talk to fit the way they

formulated the question for the talk. (The others talks this week were “Why Believe the

Bible?” and “The Meaning of Life.”) There were not a lot of questions in the Q&A, but one of

the Christians commented afterwards that what I said about the role that faith may play in

God’s actions in a fallen world was new and helpful for him.

Upcoming:

Thurs Apr 6, 6:30 pm Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm “Science & Christianity: Worldviews in

Conflict?”

Netherlands

Friday Apr 7: Fly to Eindhoven, Netherlands; then train to Groningen (northern Netherlands)

6 pm U. of Groningen (International student ministry) “The Cost of

Discipleship: Is It Worth It?”

Sat. – Tues Staying with our friends Arjen & Maaike Joose (and family) in Amersfoort

Mon. Apr 10: 7 pm in Utrecht, Open Q&A with Utrecht students (they are on Easter break)

Guido, the IFES Netherlands staff worker has arranged the meeting.

Germany

Wed. Apr 12 Train to Aschaffenburg, Germany for Presence 17 (the all-Europe IFES Easter

Conf)

Again, thanks for your prayers

Addendum 1: Argument from “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?

I didn’t draw quotes from Nagel’s famous article (you can easily find it online), but

summarized it as:

• Surely, bats flying in a cave have some kind of

subjective experience “what it is like for them.”

• Because it is an experience through echolocation, it

will not be exactly like our visual experience.

• Even if one had a complete knowledge of all the physical

facts about a bat, one would still not know what it is like

to be a bat.

• But, if naturalism is true, then all facts ultimately must

be physical facts (the fact of what it is like to be a bat

must be identical to some set of physical facts)*

• But this fact of bat experience is not identical to any

set of physical facts.

Conclusion: The naturalist’s concept of reality is wrong. It leaves out everything experiential

(even the person)!

* I didn’t address John Searle’s “emergent property” view of conscious experiential facts. He

does not think that these are identical with any set of physical facts even though he is a

physicalist (he holds that there is nothing but physical entities and systems). His view,

however, leaves no room for mental facts to have any causal role. All the causal story must

lie in the mass/energy interactions in the brain, and that there are mental facts which

emerge out of such physical systems does give these facts any causal relevance for future

states of the brain. But there is good reason to think that a feeling of pain, say, does have

survival value and hence must play a causal role.

Addendum 2 Making moral claims & moral relativism

The student’s question basically was, “Can’t a person view moral claims as being relative to

culture, yet make moral claims.”

My response was, first, to note that when one speaks of the meaning of moral claims,

one may be asking “What is really going on when one makes a moral claim?” To this

question a purely functional answer can be given, namely that what it means to make a

moral claim is to express one's approval or disapproval about an issue, as well as perhaps to

express societal consensus on the issue, and this in an imperative way "Don't … !" or "Do

…!" But such a functional analysis of the meaning of moral claims is not the same as what

the conventions in a particular language community imply with respect to the meaning of

moral claims. And these conventions entail that when a person says something like

"Infanticide is morally wrong" (and is expressing their conviction) they cannot believe that it

being morally wrong only holds for people or communities who view it as being morally

wrong. If the person making the claim thinks infanticide is morally okay for those who think

it is morally okay, then he/she does not really believe that infanticide is morally wrong. It is

simply a cultural norm which they embrace. It is a misuse of English for the person to say

"Infanticide is morally wrong" (and believe it to be morally wrong) and at the same time

believe that it is a norm that only expresses the personal or societal disapproval.

My second response was when people say they accept moral relativism, the almost

always still make moral claims and mean what the conventions entail. I.e. they really do

think, say, that those who view women as inferior to women hold to a morally deficient

view. I.e. they don’t think that the moral claim ceases to be correct for anyone or any

culture that doesn’t agree with it.

Payne Europe 2017 #9 April 1, 2017 Janet and I are at the home of Per and Annelise Landgren south of Gothenburg above an ocean inlet. It is our third time staying with this very special family, all strong Christians. Their son Örjan is the one who invited me to speak here in Gothenburg. Tomorrow morning, Sunday, we take a train up to Stockholm for a full week of events up there.

Update: Copenhagen March 25-30 — all at University of Copenhagen Although our talks were Wed and Thurs we were able to attend most of the earlier talks (Mon & Tues), including early morning prayer, lunch talks, and evening talks. We were able to interact with both the Christian students running the mission and non-Christians at the talks.

Janet with Laura, who was our host at the Danish Easter conf. in 2016

Wed March 29 noon-1 pm “Does Ethics Need a Foundation in God?” The challenge for this talk was having only 20 minutes for the presentation. I didn’t have a powerpoint projector but this actually helped in being able to keep within the time frame. It all came together quite well and the questions in the Q&A were excellent. Three non-Christian students with whom I some good conversation on Tuesday came up to me afterwards to thank me for the talk.

Thurs March 30 noon-1 pm “Is It Possible to Be a Better Person?” (Janet, the speaker) Janet did a good job in her presentation. Given the topic and after discussions with the leaders here, she decided to make it quite personal in character, sharing from her own experience and challenges in growing as a person and as a Christian. This gave a rare view into the life of a Christian after the intellectual approach of the other lunch talks. The Christian faith wove into what Janet said, but she laid out principles that could have application for non-Christians as well as for Christians. She was told by several afterwards that this was something the Danish students really needed to hear.

from Janet I compared self-improvement, pictured by a ladder, with personal growth, pictured by a tree planted by the water with root deep into good soil with fruit resulting naturally. (I pointed out that the words from the Bible are “rooted and established in love,” and that the

fruit is described as love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, and more.) For a Christian, this involves putting down roots into God’s love and learning to love as he first loved us. For all, becoming “better” is not pulling ourselves up, but instead, digging our roots deep— into good soil, into love, into relationships, and then, growing fruit.

But it also has application for putting down roots into relationships. The pitfalls of climbing a ladder is that the focus is on one’s own effort without realizing we need a change of heart. Also, one is inclined to compare oneself with others on the ladder, who seem to be higher or lower than oneself. And finally, many think they can reach God by becoming better and better, but relative goodness is not enough. (I explained briefly why.) I finished by sharing five principles that came from what I had been saying.

6 – 7:30 pm “The Resurrection of Jesus? … But … Dead Men Don’t Rise!?” Originally, I had thought that I would simply sum up my conclusion on the historical case and then focus on “But Dead Men Don’t Rise!” However, the billing of it put the emphasis the other way around. It also became clear in talking to the staff and students that they really wanted the case for the resurrection to be laid out. I put together a combined powerpoint, but in spite of cutting out parts here and there, in the end it was still too long. What I did therefore was to follow the powerpoint in laying out the historical case, but not for the “But Dead Men Don’t Rise” part. This actually worked quite well. Now, the hardest part: With this being the last talk of the mission, they wanted me to invite response. In talking about what they would like, they decided they would like for me to offer a sample prayer which would illustrate how one might take the step of becoming a follower of Jesus. At this point I only had about 30 minutes to compose what I would say. God, however, was gracious, and what came together worked well. I didn’t do a “line-by-line pray after me” format. Rather I read a prayer that they could reflect upon as I read it. And if the content of it made sense, my encouragement was for them to talk to me or any of the leaders for the event. (In the Addendum is my prayer.) I did this at the end of my talk. But knowing that I would do this, I started the talk sharing a bit more personally. (Also see Addendum) After the prayer, three students did a musical piece before my coming back for Q&A. After a good Q&A, I talked for a good ½ hour with a naturalist student, Jakob, with whom I hope to keep in touch. Janet had a good conversation during that time with a student who asked a question during the Q&A. She was so astonished that our faith was rooted in history (in Jesus). But

that’s in the PAST! Janet said that is was also existential and relational because we have a LIVING God. There were other Christians at the table talking to her. She thanked one of them for inviting her to a lunch talk (by passing out little papers about the event and free lunch.) She said it was just the right amount of persuasion to get her to two of the talks.

Gothenburg, Sweden noon – 1 pm Chalmers Tech U. “Does Ethics Need a Foundation in God?” We caught an early am train to Gothenburg. I was able to reconnect there with a couple of students with whom I had talked last year. The talk was well attended (probably 60). I had thought I would use a powerpoint for the talk, but time ran out before I could finish it. So, although I used some intro slides, I didn’t follow the powerpoint for the rest of the talk. From my perspective, the talk could have gone more smoothly. Nonetheless, I covered all the key ideas that I had wanted to cover, and I was pleased with the Q&A. A group of about five students gathered around me afterwards for another 15 minutes of interaction.

Coming up: Sweden (Stockholm and Linköping)

Sun Apr 2: 4 pm Peter preaching on “The Case for the Resurrection” at church just north Stockholm. We are staying with a family all week. Campus Mission at KTH (Technology U in Stockholm) Mon Apr 3 noon – 1 pm (lunch talk) “Science and Christianity: Worldviews in Conflict?” (Prayer time and dinner with Christian students in late afternoon.) Tues Apr 4 noon – 1 pm (lunch talk at KTH) “Does Ethics Need a Foundation in God?” *Linköping, Sweden Wed Apr 5 noon – 1 pm (lunch talk with medical students) (University of Linköping) “Why Is God So Unfair?” *back to Stockholm Thur Apr 6: 5:30 – 6:30 pm Karolinska Institutet (Med School) “Science and Christianity: Worldviews in Conflict?” Addendum: The Prayer: Father God, I have been struggling for a while with whether you are there. I think you are. I feel like the man who said to Jesus, “I believe, help my unbelief.” It is beginning to make sense that you are there and that you having been waiting for me for quite a while. I acknowledge that I have been trying to run things on my own, wanting my way rather than your way. Forgive me Lord. I am also beginning to understand a bit better what you did for me through your Son Jesus, that you were willing to die that I might have life. I still don’t understand everything, but I have come to believe, at least as best I can, that you rose, defeating death, and that, if I trust in you, you give me your life through your Spirit, a life that begins now but does not end. You gave yourself for me. Lord I come before you now to give myself to you. Lord, be the leader of my life from this point on. I am not sure all of what this means, and I still have questions, but I ask that you help me as I follow you. Thank you for promising your help. I need it! And thank you Lord for the new adventure that lies ahead of me in the company of your family Amen

Payne Europe 2017 #8

Monday, March 27, 2017

The campus mission here in Copenhagen starts today. We met with some of the students

for breakfast and prayer this morning. Most of the events will be at the U. of Copenhagen

(CSS) (where we will be speaking) and two lunch events will be at the Danish Technological

University (DTU). The two lunch talks there and the first two evening talks are being given

by Christian Hofreiter from Austria (hence in English). He got his Ph.D. in philosophy from

Oxford. ("After Events" = Evening Events) Please pray throughout the week for the mission.

Peter and Janet

March 25, 2017

We have had a full and rewarding time here in Hungary. Today we fly to Copenhagen to participate in a

campus mission, at the . Janet and I will each be giving a lunch to

talk. I’ll be giving the last evening talk. Wed. Mar. 29: Lunch talk (Peter) “Does Ethics Need a Foundation in God? Thurs. Mar. 30: Lunch talk (Janet), “Is It Possible to Become a Good Person? Evening talk (Peter) “The Resurrection of Jesus? … but … dead men don’t rise!?” That last evening talk is the close of the mission; so not only does it combine what is usually two talks but

needs to end with an encouragement for students to act on what they have been hearing.

(You have already seen Sunday to Tuesday.)

We had time this morning to walk in the sun. The city has made huge improvements since our first trip in

2004.

Mar. 22 6 pm, Budapest, ELTE Law School

This is a hot issue in Hungary. It is predominantly Catholic with a sizeable Protestant population,

including Reformed. About 20 were present. There is a need here for an understanding of the wide

range of people and the causes involved, and most important, that they are people loved by God. Peter

compared secular and Christian ethics in general, sexual ethics in particular, and then applied that to the

homosexual issue. The translator did an excellent job, and students asked good questions. One woman,

Zsuzsanna, who had heard Peter in 2013 arranged to see us afterwards, so we met her for coffee.

. Mar. 23 4 pm, Budapest, Catholic U, “ ”

About 40 attended and again there were good questions. One student asked about animal suffering, and if

one is “old earth,” as I am, this raises the question of animal suffering and death prior to the fall.

(Addendum to added later.)

8 pm, Gödölõ (just east of Budapest), Szent István U. “ ”

We had a quick connection to a train out of town. This university is an agricultural school and has a lot of

international students, and it was an international Christian fellowship that invited us. The talk was

without translation although there were Hungarians present as well, 35 probably. We were met at the

train station by Gregory, a Nigerian. Again, there was good Q&A.

. Mar. 24 4 pm Budapest U. of Technology

This, the last talk, had around 18 in attendance. It is not far from the MEKDSZ office, and three of the

MEKDSZ staff were there. One student in particular asked excellent questions. From the skeptic

character of the questions, I had assumed that he probably not a Christian, but it turns out that he is. He

just asks probing questions. We and others talked further after the talk. One, Zoli, asked what I had said

about suffering when I had addressed that topic.

We fly to Copenhagen this afternoon (Saturday).

Payne Europe 2017 #4 March 15, 2017 [Sent from Vilnius, Lithuania Thurs. Mar. 16. It some time from the initial writing.] We are at the Helsinki Airport waiting to fly to Vilnius, Lithuania. It has been good to renew personal connections: Junni (the General Secretary for OPKO - IFES Finland), Ilkka and Sari (other OPKO staff); Timo (with whom I stayed on my first visit). Interestingly, one student, a Sikh, who came up to talk with me after the Turku debate had heard me 3 years ago when he was a freshman. Monday Mar 13: 2pm Theological Institute of Finland, Open Discussion Usually, this institute meets for prayer on Mondays at 2 pm , but on this occasion they invited us to share a bit about ourselves and interact with them on some challenges facing the Christians both in the US and in Europe.

Monday Mar 13: Univ of Aalto in Espoo "The Strong Promises of Prayer" Espoo is the Silicon Valley of Finland and Aalto U. is a tech school. The talk took place on campus at a chapel built by a Christian student fellowship, "The Cross of the Guild" in 1950. The talk was on the strong promises both from Jesus and in James and 1 John. The photo below shows the discussion in the middle of the talk. Snacks and good discussion followed the talk.

Tuesday Mar. 14 4 pm Univ. of Turku "The Origin of the Universe" Veritas Forum Debate My debating opponent was an American, Joseph Almog. We think a lot of the students came because they had classes with both him and the moderator. There were 90 people there in a full auditorium. Only save students marked on the response cards that they were Christians, so it was a great turnout. My debating opponent believed in God but in a vague way. (God is known through encounter with everything in the natural world. Texts [e.g. the Bible] are not important.) The frustrating part for me (and the moderator) was that he barely addressed the topic (beyond saying that science and God are not opposed) and paid no attention to time limits. This meant that there was time only for four or five questions from the audience (although good questions). My hope is that students were helped by what I had to say. (The university is a largely humanities school; so some had the challenge of not knowing much about cosmology.) The moderator was a naturalist who nonetheless has been quite supportive of Veritas events in Turku. Hopefully I will be able to maintain some contact with him. Photos show the debate and the snack and discussion time afterward. Sorry no Janet. I (Janet) don’t have time to look on Peter’s phone. :) More to come. We are in Lithuania right now - speaking in an hour. Peter and Janet

Payne Europe 2017 #3

March 12, 2017

Update:

Thursday March 9: I-Café in Zürich "Doubt"

The International Café is held in the office for VBG in Zürich. Going there the day

before, we were able to meet some of the VBG staff.

The talk itself is one I particularly like giving. It was not a large group, but that enabled

Janet and I to have good interaction with them over dinner before the talk and then

afterwards.

Saturday March 11: Luther Church, Helsinki "Why Is There Something Rather Than

Nothing?"

On the flight from Zürich I finished reading A Universe from Nothing by atheist physicist

Lawrence Krauss. That, plus earlier reading of Hawking's The Grand Design, was good

prep. I, however, still had a lot to do on the 11th putting the powerpoint together. That

was a bit stressful, but the event went quite well. I had 30 minutes, then a philosophy grad

student and a moderator came up for questions and comments. I enjoyed the interaction

with Ilmari ( my dialogue partner), and the questions from the audience were engaging and

philosophical - several people were from the university. (I have emailed Ilmari about

perhaps meeting again over coffee today or tomorrow. Please pray for that. Our host,

Danielle with Veritas Forum, said he is open to the Christian faith.

Coming Up: Finland

Sunday: 5 pm Attend an English-speaking church in Helsinki

Monday: 2 pm Informal interaction with instructors and students at the Theological

Institute of Finland

Monday: 6 pm Aalto University in Espoo: "The Strong Promises of Prayer"

This is a meeting with a Christian group called "The Cross of the Guild"

Tuesday: 4:15 pm Turku: University of Oulu, "The Origin of the Universe”.

This is another Veritas Forum event. It will be a debate with Joseph Almog (an American

teaching at the U of Turku in their philosophy dept.). It is not clear what his beliefs are [not

an atheist - I am told].

Tuesday 7 pm Continuing (post-debate) discussion at the Methodist Church

Late Tuesday we are driven back to Helsinki, and on Wednesday we fly to Vilnius,

Lithuania.

Thanks for your prayers

Peter (and Janet)

Paynes Europe 2017 #1

We fly tomorrow afternoon with Norwegian from Oakland to Stockholm. So this is the

first our set of Europe 2017 updates. Pray that we get some sleep on the overnight

fight. Flying east it is difficult to get even 5 or 6 hours of sleep. I have some lingering

congestion (recovering from a cold); so pray for that and good health for both of us. In

Stockholm we will be staying for two days with an American family, Ray and Kay Baker, who

serve with Credo, the IFES ministry there.

Below is the schedule for out trip as it stand now.

Umeå: Sunday March 5 - Tuesday March 7

Sunday we fly north 1 hour to Umeå, Sweden. I gave a pair of lectures there last year

and had excellent conversations with two students who, through our interaction ,came to

some renewed hope that they might again be able to believe. I have had email contact with

both of them, Jonas and Marcus, and they are looking forward to our being able to

reconnect. I don't know what has transpired for them spiritually over this past year. Pray for

them and our interaction.

Sunday evening Janet and I will meet with some of the student leaders at the home

where we will be staying.

Monday: noon to 1 pm: "Is There Proof that God Exists?"

Monday: 7-8:30 pm: "If God does (or doesn't) exist, then what?"

I found out these topics just three days ago. They are different from what I have done

before, although the first is similar to the first lecture last year, "Does God exist - Where

Does the Evidence Point?" The evening talk will be strongly interactive. Pray for the quick

preparation needed.

Tuesday: we fly back to Stockholm and immediately on to Zürich, Switzerland

Thanks for your prayers!

Peter (and Janet)