apologetics

Marvel not when the unbeliever denies your claim of inner transformation and life in Christ. They are dead and are wholly unable to know the life that is in Christ, which is given only to those who place their faith (belief & trust) in Him as Savior.

It should be no more surprising that unbelievers should deny every spiritual experience of the Christian than it should surprise you that a corpse ignores those attending a funeral.

Knowing this should spur us on not in arguments or debates with unbelievers but rather in proclaiming the Gospel to them. Through the Gospel, the Lord may grant them faith; only then will they stand upon the same ground as we believers do, and being awakened to spiritual life, they are now free and able to come to an understanding about what is spiritual.

There’s a reason the Scriptures tell us to rebuke heretics only twice; to continue to land blows upon the dead just makes you look silly, and in my experience, it gets messy quick. Besides, surely you have better things to do?

Popularity: 2%

First Peter 3:15 says, But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear (New King James Version).

I have a great hope within me — a blessed hope that is Jesus Christ. Today I was asked why.

And I confess that can be a difficult question to answer. After all, in our day & age, having hope in Jesus Christ as the only hope of salvation & eternal fellowship with God is a difficult thing for many to swallow. I wouldn’t expect it to be anything different, though — the generic “No Monopoly on the Truth!” religion of, for example, Miss Oprah Winfrey is hard to avoid.

It’s increasingly questioned, then, how I and so many others can make the statement, “Only in Jesus Christ is there any hope of Heaven; anyone who has not believed in Jesus Christ in a biblically meaningful way are already condemned to Hell.”

My answer for my hope is the hope itself: Jesus Christ. And really, as brazen as that statement may seem coming from me, it was stated in boldness by the Man Christ Jesus Himself nearly two millennia ago:

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. ¹⁷For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. ¹⁸He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. ¹⁹And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. ²⁰For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. ²¹But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.” John 3:16-21, NKJV

So why do I believe in Him?

The simplest and most theological answer I could give is that I believe in Him because the Father dragged me to Christ, quickening my spirit, and granting me faith to believe, faith which my newly alive spirit could not help but express.

But here are some other reasons for curious unbelievers to consider. I am not saying these are foolproof answers; indeed, if you are an obstinate unbeliever, you’ll find cause to object to each and every one of these and won’t waste any time in not thinking about them — fair enough, for the Scriptures certainly do anticipate that response from so many. If there are any out there who have honest questions regarding these points, by all means post them. If you’re posting not out of curiosity but out of a desire to argue or debate or whatever, you are welcome to due so at The Roundtable.

• I believe in Jesus Christ because He rose from the dead. The apostles — eyewitnesses to the life and death of Jesus Christ — went to their graves proclaiming that Jesus Christ had risen from the grave, having conquered death. Opponents to Christianity (including the mighty Roman Empire) did not squelch the message of the apostles by way of exposing the still-dead body of Christ, for there was no still-dead body to expose! Unable to reveal what they felt was the truth, they instead resorted to massacring Christians.
• I believe in Jesus Christ because of the testimony and character of the apostles. These men spent years with Jesus Christ, growing in understanding of Him and the Old Testament, and when He died, they disbanded believing He had been defeated. Yet in no time at all, the apostles became an indomitable force in the spread of the message of Christ. Having seen Him alive with their own eyes, they risked their lives testifying of His. Were these men charlatans, they would be the twelve most wicked, most damnable tricksters in all of history, for their message has led to the martyr deaths of countless believers. Yet it is extraordinarily unlikely that these men would themselves be deceivers, for they died (some very brutally) affirming their beliefs.
• I believe in Jesus Christ because the once Christ-hating, Christian-murdering Paul would become perhaps Christianity’s greatest evangelist, proclaiming the truth of Christ in cities even after having been beaten and dragged out of the same!
• I believe in Jesus Christ because the Old Testament foretells of a coming Messiah who would provide salvation for His followers, and Jesus Christ fits the bill perfectly. First century Jews didn’t hate Jesus Christ because He wasn’t fulfilling the prophecies; rather, in fulfilling the prophesies and revealing Himself to be God come in the flesh, the Jews conspired to kill Him.
• I believe in Jesus Christ because He is the unifying theme of the Scriptures. This is a book written over thousands of years by over forty writers from various classes and occupations, ranging from prophet to king, shepherd to Roman tax collector. Given all of that, it is remarkable that from beginning to end, the Scriptures are unified and consistent.
• I believe in Jesus Christ because of the preservation of the Scriptures. Thousands of years after John penned the final “Amen” in Revelation, we are still unearthing increasingly earlier manuscripts, parchments, and papyrii of the Scriptures; no matter how early this evidence it, the same Scriptures (albeit assuredly in a differently language than English!) are found thereon. The claim that the Scriptures have been manipulated throughout history is groundless. While certain groups may translate the Bible in a way which is biased to their beliefs, the underlying manuscript evidence is miraculously uniform, with variants most often consisting of spelling and word order; where the variances are even larger, no significant doctrine is affected.

I could go on, but others have already put together much more thorough answers for our hope. For the above reasons and more, I believe I am right about Jesus Christ.

Still, the most poignant reason is the first — producing the dead body of Christ was impossible for the First Century Romans, and it is still impossible today.

Paul, writing about twenty years after the Crucifixion, said this about the Christian’s faith: Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up–if in fact the dead do not rise. For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable, (1 Corinthians 15:12-19, New King James Version).

When Paul wrote that, there were still eyewitnesses alive who were at the Crucifixion. The Romans at any time could have went to the tomb in which Jesus had been buried, unearth Him, and parade the lifeless body around to believers in Corinth, in Galilee, and anywhere else they may have been. But they didn’t. They couldn’t.

Jesus Christ is risen.

He is my hope, and He is the reason for my hope.

I do not believe that I am right; rather, I believe with certainty that the Scriptures are. I am only right insofar as my beliefs line up with the Scriptures’ teachings.

Popularity: 4%

In my previous post I reviewed The Golden Compass as a movie and didn’t go into the more controversial aspects of the story — that of its portrayal of the Church and of God. However, I didn’t want to simply let those things go after having responded to a critic of the story two posts ago; now that I’ve seen the movie for myself, what do I say?

Well, perhaps most notably, is that there was no character in the movie that went by the name of God.¹ This movie did not portray the death of God. Actually, if the movies stick to what the books portray, that won’t happen until the third film, though apparently TGC’s God character simply dies of old age, despite an attempt by the story’s protagonist to help him.

Anyway, in light of that, I do not think TGC the movie will do no more harm to the idea of “God” than a 24-hour clock would.

Within the world of TGC there exists an entity known as the Magisterium. This Magisterium is the ruling power of the world and has its hands in just about everything — including scientific progress. As Nicole Kidman’s character — who worked for the Magisterium — put it, they tell people what to do in a “kindly” sort of way in order to keep people out of trouble.

Disobeying the Magisterium is of course seen as a challenge to Authority, and such disobedience may be punished as heresy.

I cannot help but be reminded of an episode of Star Trek: Voyager called “Distant Origin”; in it, an alien scientist believes that his reptilian race, the Voth, had its origins on Earth, thousands upon thousands of lightyears away from their current home. Upon tracking down Voyager, the scientist Forra Gegan confirms his findings that humans and his race have the same genetic ancestry. The Voth Ministry of Elders, however, condemn his findings as heresy against Doctrine.

It doesn’t take a Masters of Divinity degree to realize that both the Magisterium & the Voth Ministry of Elders are meant to represent Christianity and its attempts to maintain power.

But is that real Christianity? Or is it simply a straw man which is far easier to knock down than characterizing those who actually live out what Jesus taught?

To be quite honest after having seen the first movie, I get the impression that Philip Pullman (TGC author) doesn’t so much have a problem with Christianity but with authority in general. The protagonist Lyra points out that she doesn’t like to be told what to do, and neither does her father, who the Magisterium attempted to kill due to his research into Dust.²

All told, the plight of the film’s protagonists against the Magisterium seems more like V attempting to overthrow the British government³ than it does atheists attempting to do whatever it is they do to irk Christian/government/thing…⁴

Is the message threatening? Perhaps, if you’re defending an Orwellian churchstate.

The movie was not without its flaws — both in its story and in its morality — but a threat to the concept of God in the minds of children it is not. If it is, I cannot help but wonder how weak an idea of God is being presented to children within the Church.

Popularity: 6%

1. Or Yahweh or Jesus or Jehovah, or anything else. [↩]
2. In the world of TGC, Dust is supposed to represent Original Sin, though it seems much more like the concept of the Age of Accountability; either way, the Magisterium seeks to suppress knowledge of Dust, which is odd — one would expect a type of the Christian Church to be the one teaching a corresponding type of sin… [↩]
3. See V for Vendetta. [↩]
4. Seriously, the only real life entity which comes close to the Magisterium is the Roman Catholic Church, and I certainly don’t equate them with Christianity. [↩]

After several years of owning the book, I’ve started to read The Joy of Pi by David Blatner. It’s a delightful book — beautifully illustrated, witty, filled with fun(!) quotes about the mysterious little π — which I think I’d recommend to others once I finish it; at the very least, I bet Dad would enjoy it.

However, what stands out most in my mind from The Joy of Pi is this paragraph, found on page twenty-nine:

The first millennium C.E. saw the Dark Ages in Europe, which were filled with war and strife following the breakdown of the Roman Empire and the rise in power of early Christianity. Any budding scientific interest in Europe during these years was effectively quelled by religious intolerance or destroyed by warring factions. But knowledge has a way of traveling to where it will flourish, and pi (along with many other facets of Western thought) managed to pop up in the more nurturing academic climate of the Muslim world.

The mathematics of π may seem of little consequence to you, but the fact of the matter is that π shows up in far too many places for it to be ignored. Whether in engineering, physics, mathematics, or astronomy (or any number of other fields), having a solid understanding of π is beneficial. As Augustus De Morgan wrote, “This mysterious 3.14159 … which comes in at every door and window, and down every chimney” (A Budget of Paradoxes, as cited in The Joy of Pi).

Yet the “academic climate” in Europe over 1,000 years ago prevented much progress from being made. The earth was flat, located at the center of the universe, and the sun revolved around it… and the Church was content with that.

3.141592653
58979323846
26433832795
…

At that point in history, scientific advancement posed no real threat to Christianity; after all, the earth can be a tiny speck in a galaxy which itself is a tiny speck in a vast, expanding universe without it losing its position in the sight of God. Does holding God’s attention require that the earth stand out as the midpoint of everything? When talking about a God who is glorified by turning sinners’ hearts to Him, I find it amazing that Earth is but a speck in the cosmic dance, yet still at the center of His plan. That is how He seems to operate — what is central, magnificent, or glorious from a naturalistic standpoint is overlooked by the Almighty, for He is looking for the broken, the poor, the insignificant… A wretch like me, for instance.

Eventually, science was “allowed” to progress in Europe. And it has continued to grow.

And today, two major scientific paradigms “threaten” the Christendom yet again: the big bang theory and the theory of evolution.

You’d think that … men of faith would finally start to realize that science poses no threat to Christianity.

You’d think that after millennia of unnecessary bickering between men of faith and men of science, the men of faith would finally start to realize that science poses no threat to Christianity. Rather, whatever scientific advances are made seem to repeatedly show God to be all the greater — rather than being the Creator & Sustainer of air, earth, fire, water, and quintessence, He is Creator & Sustainer of hydrogen, helium, lithium, beryllium, boron, et al.

To quote my father:

Science is a study of the physical world around us. As it stands today, evolutionary theory is the paradigm under which science functions. There are literally mountains of data from many different fields that support this paradigm.

He didn’t include it, but the same could be said for the big bang theory; it & evolutionary theory are the paradigms within which modern day chemistry, biology, astronomy, cosmology, physics, and so on are operating.

Is science more threatening than Hell? I hardly think so.

And what’s wrong with that? To my Christian brethren I ask, do you believe what Jesus said? If the gates of Hell are unable to ever to prevail against us, why do we act as though science is out to end all that we hold dear? Is science more threatening than Hell? I hardly think so. It must be that science is simply more terrifying than Hell; after all, isn’t it easier — especially for those who may be weak in the faith or may not even be true believers at all — to fear that which can be seen?

Science cannot prove or disprove God. I’m sorry if you think it can, but you’re wrong, wholly & thoroughly. Even if it could, what would be the point? Unbelievers will still be unbelievers even if they saw the dead raised to life; and believers should be believers, and happy are those who believe & have not seen! Only the Lord can convert the heart of man, so why waste so much of your time on attempting to prove the Lord’s existence to the unbelieving atheists, humanists, and so on of the world? You’ll get nowhere even if your arguments are compelling.

You were not commissioned by God to go out and prove His case. You were commissioned to go out and to preach the gospel. That is the means the Lord has chosen to change the hearts of His elect. No amount of scientific presentation can improve upon that. “Repent and believe…” What? That God created the Earth and that evolution is bogus? No. “Repent and believe the Gospel.”

And within no biblical description of the Gospel and within no historic Christian confessions of the Gospel that I’m aware of will you find believers quibbling with unbelievers over the origins of man and of the cosmos.

And just so there’s no confusion, I have posted a bit about the Gospel recently, so check them out.

But Rick, the Bible teaches us that God created man? You’ll get no argument from me on that. I wholeheartedly believe Genesis 1 & 2. The same goes for Genesis 3 through Revelation 22.

Wait, didn’t you say evolution is okay and isn’t a threat? Doesn’t it teach us that man evolved from monkeys?? What I said is that evolution may very well be a valid paradigm within which science can operate, and no, it is not a threat.

What evolution does is explain how life operates today and presumably for everyday prior. If it bugs you that humans & animals appear so closely related, I encourage you to go back to Genesis 1 & 2 and notice that not only were we all created by the same God, but we were also all created from the same material — earth. How much difference are you really hoping to find? After all, the key difference, biblically, is that man was designed in the image of God. How, pray tell, can science test such a thing? It can’t.

How, pray tell, can science test such a thing? It can’t.

And if it cannot be tested, it cannot be disproven, and so I say again: Science — even the theory of evolution — is not a threat.

After all, what conclusion would you expect science to draw? God has given us life upon the earth which is genetically very similar. Likewise, He has created reproductive mechanisms which allow for mutations within the genetic code. And the environment within which all of this is taking place results in the survival of those creatures best suited for it (a penguin doesn’t stand a camel’s chance in the desert, after all).

Given the similarities, fact of mutations, and so on — the evidential framework within which science works — the paradigm of evolution is derived. It explains — in a secular manner, mind you — the origins of life. Scientists do not come to that conclusion to be hostile to Christianity. Indeed, it is the only conclusion which may be drawn without direct intervention by the Holy Spirit in their souls, enabling them to believe in the biblical testimony.

Scientists do not come to the conclusion of evolution to be hostile to Christianity.

Yet even still, the biblical testimony does not negate the available evidence. To the contrary, the Scriptures reassure us that the Heavens declare the glory of God, that the earth is the Lord’s, and that all of Creation declares His existence. There is rest & solace in those truths, and I do not think they were ever meant to be apologetic battle cries for creation ministries.

Are you saying then, Rick, that ministries like Answers in Genesis are a waste of time? Not necessarily. If I haven’t made it clear yet, attempting to make biblical creation a viable scientific alternative to current accepted paradigms is a waste of time. Biblical creation, while I believe it to be true, is admittedly untenable within science, and that should be wholly unsurprising to anyone who understands science. Miracles (including Creation, the Resurrection, and the new birth of believers), by definition, are scientifically impossible, which is fine. We can rest in the truth that with God nothing is impossible.

To my Christian brethren reading this, I encourage you to step out of the way of scientific progress. Two-thousand years from now — excepting the possible return of Christ — the Church will still be going strong and science will still be seeking the betterment of mankind.

I can’t help but think of what advancements would have already been made if Christendom & science could have been working together from the beginning. And frankly, I’d like to see where science is taking the world today, without causing scientists to waste time responding to & debating Creationists concerning things which are outside the realm of science.

At the end of the day, God’s Word stands true…

Let the evolutionist believe in evolution. Let the big bang theorist believe in the big bang. And let them continue to see where science is taking us. Maybe someday new advancements will overrule evolution & the big bang (effectively making all the Creation vs. Evolution debates that much bigger a waste of time), but we as Christians should let the experts work those issues out. At the end of the day, God’s Word stands true and the Church suddenly has more time to focus on evangelism rather than fruitless debate.

According to The Joy of Pi, π has been calculated out to over 51 billion digits (the millionth is “1″). And wonder of wonders, the Church still survives — nay, thrives. Science has brought us fantastic technologies — such as radio and the internet — which has allowed the Gospel to be spread to countless souls who would have otherwise likely never heard the news.

Science is not a threat. It isn’t even scary. It should be embraced by the Church, utilized to fulfill the Great Commission, rather than striven against to fulfill a commission not found within the pages of Scripture. Preach the Gospel, allow God to give the increase, and trust in Him to transform the minds of the regenerate through His Word.

Popularity: 7%