Biblical Apologetics
Is It Biblical?
Introduction
Biblical apologetics is the “so-called science” of both establishing the existence of the God of the Bible and defending the validity of the Christian faith, neither of which practices have any foundation in the Holy Scriptures. The existence of God is taken as fact in the Bible and those who deny this fact are said to be fools (Psa. 14:1, 53:1). The truth of the Scriptures being the word of God is also taken as fact, and no attempt is made anywhere in the Bible to defend it as such.
This is because the word of God does not require proof; it requires obedience. We are to obey it because: “Thus saith the LORD.” And to those who ask, “How can people be expected to obey it as the word of God until it is proven to be the word of God?” The answer is as follows: Those who, by the gracious and sovereign work of God, have been regenerated and thereby given “ears to hear” will recognize God's truth and Jesus voice (Jn 10:16) when they hear it, and they will obey it, regardless of any other evidence or lack of the same. And those whom God has chosen to leave in their natural unregenerate state will not know God's truth when they hear it (though they might be hypocrites who profess to know it), and they will not obey it, regardless of any other evidence or lack of the same.
“We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment: For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?" But we have the mind of Christ.” (1 Cor. 2:12-16)
“The natural man” -- that is, the man who has not been born of the Holy Spirit and is in his natural unregenerate state -- doesn't receive the things of God, is not able to know them, and they are, in fact, foolishness to him. These things are spiritually discerned and he has not the Spirit to discern them. It makes no difference how logical an apologetic argument is, and it makes no difference whether one bases his defense on extra-biblical evidence or on the testimony of the Scriptures alone. The ungodly man cannot believe because he is ungodly. “But you do not believe because you are not my sheep” (John 10:26).
On the other hand, the believer, being born of the Spirit, has “the mind of Christ” (1 Cor. 2:16). He knows the truth of the Holy Scriptures by the testimony of the Spirit of God within him. He has no need for apologetic arguments, he knows that the word of God is truth when he hears it “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me” (John 10:27).
This does not mean that an unregenerate man cannot come to an intellectual understanding of the Bible through logical reasoning, but that he cannot truly believe it -- much less obey it -- until he is converted. The means, which God uses to convert men, is the preaching of the gospel in concert with the Holy Spirit working in the hearts of the elect hearers, not carefully crafted intellectual arguments. Those who do craft such arguments make a vain attempt to appeal to the “wisdom of this world,” after the manner of the Greek philosophers, rather than through “the preaching of the cross” which “is to them that perish foolishness.”
“For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel--not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” (1 Cor. 1:17-20)
No Scriptural Support for Biblical Apologetics
There are several biblical passages, which are used to support the practice of apologetic argumentation. But the fact of the matter is that biblical apologetics -- insofar as the term is limited to the practices described at the beginning of this document -- has no scriptural support, and the apologists only impose an interpretation on certain passages of Scripture in order to justify their practices.
The one verse which is quoted in support of apologetics more than any other, is 1 Pet. 3:15:
“But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect”
Now it is true that the Greek word, which is, translated “answer” in this verse, is “apologia” which can be translated “defense.” And if one takes the one verse below and isolates it from the entirety of the Scriptures, insists on translating the word “apologia” as “defense” when it can also be translated “answer,” and then further presumes on the word of God by assuming that defense means constructing arguments in an attempt to prove the existence of God, or defending the validity of the Scriptures against those who deny it to be the word of God, then this verse can be used to support the practice of biblical apologetics.
But if one, in accordance with the only scriptural method for interpreting the Scriptures (which is comparing the word of God with itself -- see 1 Cor. 2:13), interprets this verse in accordance with the entirety of the Scriptures, then he will understand that the word of God does not anywhere sanction the aforementioned practices -- neither by commandment, nor example, nor inference. Therefore, 1 Pet. 3:15 cannot mean what the apologists claim that it means.
So what does the verse mean? Nothing more than to be always ready to have an answer for those who come to us with sincere inquiries. It does not teach that we are to engage in debates with infidels who are hardened in unbelief, though modern apologists use this verse as a sanction to debate Bible-denying atheists. Obviously such opponents are not making sincere inquiries into the reasons behind a Christian's hope. The atheists who participate in these debates only have one goal: to undermine Christianity.
Another verse which is often used to support the practice of biblical apologetics is 2 Cor. 10:5:
“We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.”
But in the context of the passage from which this verse is taken, there is no mention of anything like what the apologists do. And there is no reason to believe that Paul was referring to anything beyond the preaching of the gospel, along with the effectual working of the Spirit, as the means by which everything that exalts itself against the knowledge of God is to be cast down, and every thought is to be brought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.
Other passages which may be cited in support of apologetics, are references to Paul's practice of disputation, such as in Acts 17:17:
“So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Greeks, as well as in the marketplace day by day with those who happened to be there.”
But it is obvious, even from within this one verse that he was meeting with people who already acknowledged the authority of the Scriptures. “The Jews” and “the devout persons” would not have been opposing either Paul's belief in God or his belief that the Scriptures are the word of God; otherwise they would not have been referred to as Jews and devout persons.
This is also clear in Acts 19:8:
“Paul entered the synagogue and spoke boldly there for three months, arguing persuasively about the kingdom of God.”
Furthermore, the Greek verb “dialegomai” which is translated as “disputed” (KJV) in these verses, does not necessarily refer to an adversarial argument. It is also translated “reason,” “reason with,” “preach,” “preach unto,” and “speak” in the New Testament. In fact, the same verb “dialegomai” and the same English translation “dispute” is used in another situation where only Christian disciples were present:
But some of them became obstinate; they refused to believe and publicly maligned the Way. So Paul left them. He took the disciples with him and had discussions daily in the lecture hall of Tyrannus. (Acts 19:9)
Paul certainly would not have been engaging in an oppositional debate with his own Christian disciples.
Paul was meeting with people in the synagogue and in the marketplace, not to debate the existence of God or to prove the authority of the Bible, but to “reason with” [dialegomai] them from the Scriptures --the Scriptures whose authority they already accepted -- that Jesus is the Christ. This was his practice everywhere he went during his missionary journeys.
“As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead. "This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ, " he said.” (Acts 17:2-3)
A similar verse is Acts 9:29:
“And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians: but they went about to slay him.”
This verse refers to Paul's disputations at Jerusalem with “the Grecians,” who were not pagan Greeks, but Jews who spoke Greek rather than Hebrew, most likely because they had been born outside of Palestine and emigrated there. They probably had their own synagogues apart from the Hebrew speaking Jews and, it is assumed, this is where Paul disputed with them. Again, it is obvious that Paul was disputing with those who already acknowledged the authority of the Scriptures.
But what about those who are new to the Christian religion, those who are not yet Bible believers? How are they to be convinced of the truth of the Bible? In order to answer this question, we need to find out what method the apostolic church used to persuade the heathen to believe. Since Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, examining his practices should give us a right concept of how this is to be accomplished. And when we do such an examination, what do we find? Do we find Paul presenting evidences from physical science and archaeology, as the so-called evidential apologist does? Do we find Paul trying to reason men into seeing the inconsistency and futility of their worldview, as the so-called presuppositional apologist does? No, we see none of this.
Instead we see him doing what his Master did -- preaching a simple gospel message and telling his audience to repent and believe. A perfect example of this is Paul's message to the pagan Athenians from atop Mars' Hill (Acts 17:22-34), in which he endeavored to correct his Greek hearers of their idolatrous concept of God, told them of their need to repent of it, and preached that the resurrection of Christ was an assurance of God's anointing upon Him as Judge of all the earth. He simply declared these truths. Never did he present anything akin to the arguments used in the modern practice of biblical apologetics.
Some Objections Answered
Some might object that Christians should be willing to give answers to everyone who asks questions about the faith, regardless of their motives, because there are examples of Jesus Christ giving answers to questions presented to him by men he knew to be opposed to the truth. Several things must be observed in regard to the circumstances surrounding such questioning and Christ's responses:
(1) It was always the case that the men questioning him came to him while he was in the course of performing his ministry. Not only did He not pre-arrange meetings with them but there is not one example of Him ever going the least bit out of His way to meet them.
(2) The men who presented their insincere questions all professed to be adherents to the true religion. There is no example of any man in the Bible debating a rank unbeliever.
(3) All the recorded examples show that Jesus was among His disciples when such dialogue took place. We must assume that His answers were given for the benefit of His followers, not for the benefit of the unbelieving or for the benefit of the hypocrites.
(4) There were times when Jesus responded to questioners with silence, and other times when He gave answers, which did not directly address the question, put to him.
Others might justify the practice of debating unbelievers by pointing out that in attendance at such a debate there might be some persons who are sincerely seeking truth and that, in such a situation, God could use a Christian's defense to convict such persons of the truth. It cannot be denied that this is possible. If the Spirit of God is working in a man's heart and some biblical truth is being declared, there is no doubt that conversions could occur. However, it is highly unlikely that God would use such means to save men for the simple reason that such means are not according to the biblical model. God has given us a method by which men are to be saved. That method is through the preaching of the gospel, not through intellectual defenses. In fact, we are specifically warned not to rely on “wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect” (1 Cor. 1:18) That is, we are not to divert from the simple, scriptural gospel message of repentance of sins and faith in Christ. It is rebellion against God for men --who are wise in their own eyes -- to attempt devising their own way of sowing the seeds of salvation, and it is highly doubtful that God will ever bless such work with an abundant harvest. It is more likely that such efforts will produce no fruit at all.
Still others might reason that apologetic arguments are useful because they expose the error and folly of the non-Christian's beliefs, and thereby undermine his position, which, in turn, will prepare the way for the reception of truth. The idea is that one must be turned away from lies before he can receive the truth. As one biblical apologist recently put it, apologetics “is necessary to tear down the intellectual stumbling blocks that so many have built up as a pretense to reject the faith.” But those who make such statements show that they do not understand the nature of the problem. Man in his unregenerate condition is bitterly opposed to God and his truth. He is neither able nor willing to receive that truth until he is born of the Spirit of God. One who engages in such argumentation might indeed be successful in exposing the folly of the non-Christian's beliefs but doing so will not, in any way, bring him closer to salvation. The natural mind is not capable of accepting God's truth and, if turned away from one set of lies, will only seek another. God, in His wisdom, has ordained that men not be able to come to Him (nor be prepared to come to Him) through skillful apologetic arguments presented to man's natural, unregenerate powers of reasoning, but only through the simple truths contained in the preaching of the gospel received by a mind supernaturally regenerated by the working of God's Spirit -- which gospel, to the natural mind and it's “wisdom,” seems un-scientific and even foolish.
“For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.” (1 Cor. 1:21-25)
And it might yet be objected that it is anti-intellectual to shun logical defenses of the faith. But it is not anti-intellectual to insist upon non-intellectual solutions to non-intellectual problems. For example, no one would criticize a physician for bandaging a broken leg, rather than trying to reason the patient into healing his leg. A broken leg is not an intellectual problem and it cannot be remedied through appeals to the intellect; a broken leg is a physical problem and it must be remedied by physical means. Similarly, unbelief is not an intellectual problem and it cannot be remedied through appeals to the intellect. Unbelief is a spiritual problem and it must be remedied through spiritual means. The problem is not that unbelievers do not intellectually understand the truth of the biblical message; the problem is that they have neither the will nor the ability to receive that truth. At heart they are in bitter opposition to God -- as are all men in their natural state -- and until they are born of God, and have heeded the gospel commands to repent and believe, all appeals to their logical facilities will be in vain.
Conclusion
So what is the basis of biblical apologetics, if it is not scriptural example or precept? The writer of this document believes that it is nothing but the pride of the pseudo-Christian's heart. He wants to have one foot in his church and one foot in the world. He desires to be admired by his professing Christian friends for his intellectual prowess, and he wants to prove to the world that he has a rational basis for his beliefs. It bothers him that the scientific establishment, which dominates the world’s educational institutions, mocks Christians, and his objective is to prove to the world that he is not the fool that they would make him out to be. It is true that the Bible can be rationally defended, and it is likely that many of these men succeed in winning debates (which only serves to puff them up with pride), but it is very unlikely that they succeed in winning souls. That can only be accomplished by the means, which God has ordained: the preaching of the biblical gospel. Those who think themselves to be wise by seeking to persuade men through cleverly-constructed defenses of the faith, are in fact fools; because in doing so they demonstrate that they do not understand that the root of man's unbelief is his unregenerate spiritual condition, and that they are ignorant of God's remedy for that condition.
True Christians need to understand that there is an absolute contrast between the believer and the unbeliever, and for this reason, biblical apologetics serves no purpose. Apologetic arguments cannot benefit the godly man because he has been born of God and, therefore, he already knows God, and he is both willing and able to hear and obey God speaking to him directly through the Scriptures. Apologetic arguments cannot benefit the ungodly man because he has not been born of God, and, therefore, he does not know and cannot know God, and he is both unwilling and unable to hear and obey God speaking to him directly through the Scriptures.
Email This Study |
Corrections, Comments and Questions
Always Welcome
