Apologetics
It seems to me
that the core question of theology, philosophy, and apologetics is, “Does God
exist?” Paul raises the point this way
in Hebrews 11:6.
“But without faith it is impossible to please Him: for, he who comes to God
must believe that He exists, and that He rewards those who diligently seek Him.”
The scholastics
put forth the Ontological, Cosmological, Teleological, Moral, and Ethnological
arguments: all of which were discredited by Kant. C. S. Lewis may have relied on ideas like:
Man knows what is morally right, but refuses to do it anyway: no other created
thing does this; The claims about Christ in Scripture are such that He cannot
be denied (the trilemma: liar, lunatic, or Lord); Things like beauty and love
cannot be explained without God.
Here is another
approach. “Do you believe in the
following: The Fall and Paradise Lost: both cosmic (the Universe fell) and
personal (I fell)? Sin and Death: do I
accept their consequences (the world’s sin and death, my sin and death)? Heaven and Hell (future realities for the
Universe and for me)? Angels and
Demons? God and Satan (the Devil)? Good and Evil? The Day of Judgment (of the Universe and me)? Death and Bodily Resurrection? Spiritual Warfare: an unseen war for your
soul?[1] If you say no to any of these questions, I’d
have nothing to say to you.” All of
these questions are concrete, cosmic, and personal, not abstract, trivial, and
irrelevant. It is impossible to answer
any moral question in the abstract without misleading or being misunderstood in
some way or another: for example, is abortion right or wrong? Abortion is absolutely wrong. Yet, if you said, “No”, to any of these
questions, the truth is moot, you won’t hear it, and it may just drive you
farther away from Christ. If you said,
“Yes”, to all of these questions, and are experiencing genuine repentance, what
you need to hear is that in confession, your sin is forgiven. This is liberating. The abstract answer may enslave.
Alvin Plantinga
argues that religious exclusivism is not irrational.[2]
His argument is built around two basic hypotheses and arguments that
flow from them. "(1) The world was
created by God, an almighty, all-knowing and perfectly good personal being (one
that holds beliefs, has aims, plans and intentions, and can act to accomplish
these aims) and (2) Human beings require salvation, and God has provided a
unique way of salvation through the incarnation, life, sacrificial death and
resurrection of his divine son." He does
not show that these are true, although he believes them. He shows that it is not irrational to believe
them exclusively, in spite of many voices to the contrary.
Cornelius Van Til
talks about a man of water in an ocean of water, making a ladder of water, to
climb up and see where he is; which is to say that man cannot know. Van Til is considered a presuppositionalist,
and is thought by many to be opposed to evidence. This is not accurate. Van Til believes the evidence of Scripture. Man knows because God revealed Himself in
Scripture.
Others are
considered evidentialists; these rely on evidence, such as the empty tomb. This is a false dichotomy because knowledge
of the empty tomb comes from Scripture.
So the presuppositionalists and the evidentialists are not always as far
apart as some claim. This is not to deny
that there are areas where they do part company.
Still other
theologians, philosophers, and apologists draw their authority from other
sources. So maybe the divergence is
about one’s source of authority, or about epistemology, How does man know
anything?
The Scripture
itself claims:
I say to you, ‘Ask, and it shall be given you. Seek, and you shall find. Knock, and it shall be opened to you: for,
everyone who asks, receives; he who seeks, finds; and he who knocks, it shall
be opened to him. If a son asks for
bread from any of you fathers, will he give him a stone? If he asks for a fish, will he give him a
serpent instead of a fish? If he asks
for an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
‘If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children:
how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask
Him?’[3]
When He, the Spirit of Truth comes, He will guide you into all truth….[4]
These promises do
not appear to be limited in scope.
Evidently anyone on earth may ask, and receive guidance. This is reinforced by Solomon at the Temple
dedication where he invites anyone in the world to pray to Yahweh in the
Jerusalem Temple on Zion and receive answers from the abundance of God’s mercy.[5] The Psalms also speak repeatedly of the
loving reign of Yahweh over all the earth.
What these promises indicate is that the center of our authority is the
Holy Ghost.
The Holy Ghost is
abused in two principal ways: either He is ignored, or He is blamed for
extremes. The central reality is that He
is our power,[6] He is our
Sovereign Lord,[7] He teaches
about Jesus rather than Himself, and He teaches primarily from Scripture.
There are a few
problems with our claiming that the Scripture is our final authority. That claim appears to bypass the Father, the
Son, and especially the Holy Ghost, who is our designated Teacher. Moreover, the authoritative copy of Scripture
is not on earth, and we are not even fit to touch it.[8] Finally, we cannot possibly understand the
Scripture we have, unless the Holy Ghost teaches it to us. That being said, the Holy Ghost is not given
exclusively to anyone, but to the whole Church.
So it is very difficult, even impossible for us to know that we are on
the right track until we speak With One Voice.
For me, the
existence of God is sufficiently proved by the Presence of the Glory of God,
sometimes called the Shekinah Glory. The
person who appears, moves, and speaks intelligently with Moses and the
prophets; who calls Himself God, and gives His name as YHVH; knows no equal in
all of history. Moreover, the presence
of this person is audibly and visibly witnessed by millions upon millions of
people over the span of eight hundred sixty years. Some of the witnesses of these events spoke
with this individual personally. The
mount of Transfiguration extends this meeting into the New Testament. The evidence is overwhelming. Just read Exodus if you need more proof.
Rejecting this
evidence from Exodus for the Presence of God as a person, and therefore His
personal existence is no different than rejecting the personal existence of
Lincoln, Washington, Napoleon, Longshanks, Hus, Nero, Jesus, Julius, Alexander,
Solomon, David, Moses, Abraham, or Adam; or, for that matter, the existence of
Israel-Judah as an historic ethnic and national entity. This is to reject strong documentary evidence
on the basis of personal opinion alone.
Many have attempted to do exactly this, but their foolishness is
evident, and they have failed. Even the
promoters of the various Documentary Hypotheses have been refuted from ancient
covenant documents, frequently written in stone, which prohibits their being
dissected.[9]
Even so, many
today commonly believe that the Scriptural witness left to us is shaky and
unreliable. This is simply ignorance of
the facts. More than any other ancient
documents, the Scripture fragments and texts are in remarkable agreement; for
the most part, they only vary in minor spelling and grammar differences, and in
notes added to the text. The number of
real translatable differences is very small.
Anyone who believes that the Scriptural witness is shaky and unreliable
is invited to study textual criticism for themselves, and observe the facts
first-hand.
[2] http://carnivalsage.com/articles/apologist/plantinga-alvin-pluralism-defense-of-religious-exclusivism.html
[3]
Luke 11:9-13
[4] John 16:13
[5] 1
Kings 8:41-43
[6]
Acts 1:8
[7] 1
Corinthians 12:11
[8]
Revelation 5
[9] An
excellent refutation of the Documentary Hypotheses is found in Kline, Meredith
G., The Structure of Biblical Authority (Eerdmans, Grand Rapids,
1972): 183 pages.
No comments:
Post a Comment