The Article Archives
Topic: Truth in Culture Weekly Commentaries
|
Apologetics in the 21st Century
February 23, 2009
S. Michael Craven
As I argue in Uncompromised Faith, the study of historic Christian apologetics is essential for any person who professes to be a follower of Christ. Without venturing into the debate over classical, presuppositional, and evidential apologetics, let me just say that I believe that elements of each are helpful and not necessarily mutually exclusive. So when I use the term historic Christian apologetics, I am referring to these three primary schools of thought collectively.
For the sake of clarity, classical apologetics “stresses rational arguments for the existence of God and historical evidences supporting the truth of Christianity” (Norman L. Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2002], 154).
Presuppositional apologetics differs in that it “defends Christianity from the departure point of certain basic presuppositions” (Geisler, 607)—namely that all persons presuppose or assume certain explanations about reality that arise from their worldview. In presuppositionalism, the Christian apologist presents the truth of Christianity by exposing the fallacy of alternative worldviews, which the skeptic ultimately knows only serve to suppress the truth that in his heart he knows to be true. Finally, evidential apologetics stresses the need to first logically establish the existence of God before arguing for the truth of Christianity. Suffice it to say that these, to one degree or another, are all vital for the Christian to apprehend and be able to communicate.
However, in light of our postmodern condition, I want to emphasize the need for what I call a “cultural” apologetic. The particulars of this approach are detailed in Uncompromised Faith. In short, a cultural apologetic applies to two intellectual fronts. The first addresses the ideas or ideological influences common to a given culture. These ideas surreptitiously shape our thinking in an osmotic fashion, like the water in which a fish swims: the fish doesn’t give the water the slightest thought, it simply takes the water for granted. Such is the case with the ideas common to our culture. They are the air we breathe, and thus we scarcely give them a thought; but their influence on our thoughts, if unchecked, is formidable.
The second front pertains to social issues and their underlying ideas or worldview. These are most often expressed in the cultural debates over moral and ethical questions such as abortion, same-sex marriage, feminism, and homosexuality, to name just a few. The respective positions often represent opposing views of reality and the nature of man; yet whichever moral perspective—and its underlying worldview—gains social acceptance, this tends to form the consensus view of reality.
However, it is not enough to simply posses an intellectual understanding of these two ideological fronts; a cultural apologetic ultimately relies on a missional approach to culture if we hope to effectively confront and subvert these ideas. Currently, we tend to toss “Christian hand-grenades,” occasionally entering the culture to present our one-sided arguments for the truth of Christianity and then retreating to our churches as soon as we are done. Being missional means we act more like a rescue force that is determined to stay until all are rescued, rather than a commando unit that occasionally enters hostile territory to harass the enemy! Being missional means we endeavor to develop real and meaningful relationships with those that God, in His providence, has brought into our lives—to first demonstrate the love of Christ and then be ready with an answer to explain the hope that is within us. It means we listen more than we speak; we ask and answer questions and we expand our conversations to include more than just religion; and when we speak—for goodness sake!—we speak in normal language and not “Christianese.”
The missional Christian presses into the world wherever he or she is and pushes back the darkness with the love of Christ. The missional Christian works at really getting to know and love his neighbor, not because he has to but because he loves people as Christ commanded. This includes those neighbors that are different, difficult, or just downright unlikeable. And, yes, this includes those neighbors who share very different political views and lifestyles.
In other words, we really seek to interact and develop real relationships with the lost. It means we invite sinners into our life. It means we put up with their profanity and coarse talk. It means we love them as Christ loves them, without reservation. This is what it means to be missional. If you claim to be Christian, it is what you already are—a follower of Christ left on mission in hostile territory. If you are armed with an understanding of the cultural and social barriers that inhibit the reception of the gospel and employ this missional approach, you will go a long way toward demonstrating the relevance of Christ and His message to the unbelieving world. Toward that end I would encourage you to pick up a copy of Uncompromised Faith.
In further support of this goal, I have asked my good friend Dr. John H. Armstrong to share his helpful series “The Postmodern Context and Apologetics” beginning next week, which underscores the necessity of a new approach to Christian apologetics in the twenty-first century.
John is the founder and president of ACT 3, a ministry for the Advancement of the Christian Tradition in the third millennium. He is a former pastor and church-planter, of more than twenty years, the author/editor of eight books, and the author of hundreds of magazine, journal, and web-based articles. Besides his writing ministry Dr. Armstrong is an adjunct professor of evangelism and apologetics at Wheaton College Graduate School, teaches in various seminaries and colleges as a guest lecturer, and is a seminar and conference speaker throughout the United States and abroad.
I am certain you will find this series extremely helpful as we seek to understand our rapidly changing cultural context and how we can most effectively engage the world for Christ.
© 2009 by S. Michael Craven
|
|
Responses
|
|
Response from : Andrew Chapple |
|
|
|
February 23, 2009 10:58 AM
|
|
Is your book about apologetices available in UK?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Response from : Brian |
|
|
|
February 23, 2009 5:50 PM
|
|
Michael, your analysis is right on. I love the fish in the water analogy. I look forward to Dr. Armstrong's comments about witnessing to the Post Modern Culture. I have found it nearly impossible to connect on anything with them. It's not just what they believe, but also how they reason; it just doesn't make sense to me at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Response from : Jim D |
|
|
|
February 23, 2009 7:11 PM
|
|
I would like to better understand Hebrews 10:34. Are we not to protect our home or country when it comes to religious attacks? Or do we defend our homes only under the auspices of break ins, but not for religious attacks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Response from : Aashik Rao |
|
|
|
February 23, 2009 10:54 PM
|
|
I strongly agree with you on the need for a multifaceted approach to apologetics. A friend and I were talking a few days back about how evangelism faces a new challenge in today's generation. In the past, Christian missionaries would go into places like India, or Africa and meet people who have indigenous faiths and convert them to the life in Jesus Christ. Although that was in itself a formidable task, it meant that Christian missionaries just had to convince these indigenous tribes that the true God wasn't their pagan idols but the God of Abrahm, Isaac, and Jacob who gave His Son to die on the Cross for us.
Today, however, at least in America, our problem isn't about showing people that the true and only God is the Christian one, but about the evidential apologetics you were talking about - we need to prove God's existence first. A big barrier to evangelism in America isn't only the fact that people consider Christianity "close-minded" but more that they feel no need to believe in the supernatural. These people generally tend to be the college educated 'intellectuals' who feel that they can conquer anything in life - logic, not overpowering emotive 'fire and brimstone' sermons, is going to change them.
I live in Massachusetts, in a town, where there are only a handful of Christians in my high school - there's total of 3% Protestant Christians in the whole town. Naturally, here, people consider my Christian faith as something abnormal and ridiculous. However, there are several measures I've taken in these hostile conditions, which might be useful if applied to the worldwide postmodern culture that we face.
As a debater, I'm fairly well-versed in several of the absurd theories philosophers have come up with - notably the extremities of nihilism, skepticism, as well as the inaccuracy of the "self-based" morality - that many atheists follow. The strategy I use is basically to logically deconstruct an issue such that people see that it only makes sense if God is involved.
For example, let's take a simple belief such as "murder is bad". Rather than agree with the atheist that it is bad, I demand to know WHY they think it is bad with the following line of questioning: Why is murder bad? (Because you are killing someone else) Why is killing someone else bad? (Because you are hurting them when they did nothing to you)
Why is it bad to hurt someone? (Because it is wrong to force your will on someone else)
Why is forcing your will on others bad?
(Because humans all have liberty and if we want ours respected, we should respect the liberty of others)
Why is liberty good? (because....)
It's about here that the line of questioning ends and we find the atheist appealing to an intrinsic human belief - but the atheist cannot explain why he believes in this assumption. This is where the Christian ought to explain with God - Eventually, all 'morals' will fail to make sense because there is one assumption made to every moral. If you don't believe in God, you are making an arbitrary assumption, based on an 'inner feeling' that you don't even know about. If you do believe in God, your 'assumption' is made legitimate through Him. The basic flow of this argument is - at some point in ANY observation - ethical or scientific, there is one assumption, one link that is missing. You have two choices:
1) Act like a nihilist and say that because this link is missing, NOTHING EXISTS. Thus, you can live a life that you don't believe even exists.
2) Believe in God and that He is behind your life, driving the universe forward.
It is this approach - using the extreme of nihilism to warrant Christianity and religion in general, that works best. I am not going to convert people in my town by talking about the glory of God in shaping my life - again these people do not care for emotions - they are against religion because they think that they are beyond it and that there cannot be a supernatural, because science explains everything. It's for us to say, that everything in the world is missing ONE LINK - God fills that vacuum and legitimates reality.
You could argue that this is a modern revision of the classical apologetics approach, and perhaps so - but I think that it is unique in that, it claims that logically there are only two options: Nihilism (No purpose and no existence) and Christianity (Purpose and Life). When we give people this choice - with a logical backing - it's hard for people to reject the bread of life.
This was a really interesting article Mr. Craven - I can definitely relate to it and I think your general approach with 'cultural apologetics' is exactly what the modern evangelist needs in his/her community.
Thank you and may God bless your ministry!
-Aashik
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Response from : David VanderMeulen |
|
|
|
February 24, 2009 3:16 AM
|
|
Michael,
Great perspective and good advice. I do want to get your new book - still working on reading the other ones I've obtained from your site and others! I am seeing the message go out to the Christian community from different sources that we need to be "change agents", in the recent "Reclaiming the 7 Mtns of Culture" conference I attended in Atlanta earlier this month, organized by Os Hillman and Marketplace Leaders group. I see your "missional" message entirely consistent with this and a good thing indeed. God bless you as you continue to get the 'word' out! In Him.......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Response from : Jason Lamb |
|
|
|
February 24, 2009 6:17 PM
|
|
Very well put. Of late I've have found my contemplating the lack of critical thought and strategy among Christians when it comes to winning the lost.
http://dailyword.ning.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Response from : Robert Gates |
|
|
|
February 26, 2009 12:56 PM
|
|
What you say makes a lot of sense. It's something that has been over looked all too often.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Respond to This Article
Navigation Key
|
