I am fortunate to have loved ones who challenge me on my religious beliefs on a regular basis. It causes me to examine and study the principles of my denomination. Being that I converted to Presbyterian from Baptist when Patrick and I got engaged, I had a lot to learn about what the term "Reformed" means. And to be honest, six years later, I'm still a babe when it comes to explaining it when I am challenged. I recognize that I've leaned on Patrick to do the explaining often - nothing wrong with depending on him, but I need to be able to articulate for myself WHY I believe what I do. So, in an effort to explore that, once a week (maybe more, we'll see) I'm going to try to muddle through some language and theology that I've avoided till now. I've steered clear of these things in the past because it's a bit intimidating. You guys don't realize it - sometimes the language gets so high that a beginner can't see a point to jump in. I guess it's a matter of pride, too - that I don't want to admit that sometimes I just don't know what you're talking about. So, for those of you who may feel the same way I do, or are just interested in observing the journey, or who are curious about what "Reformed" means, too, please join me. Help me. Be patient when I use this blog as my sounding board... my outline. Understand that I know I'm not always right.
So, that's my preamble. Now I'll start with the word "apologetics" - mostly because it's one of those words I've never been sure about, and also because it's very relevent to why I am motivated to educate myself. It's a lovely word. It sounds humble. What the heck does it mean? I found this article, by Dr. Greg Bahnsen- whom I do not know (anybody know him?) that defines it pretty well, I think.
Taken from The Biblical Worldview (VII:1; Jan., 1991) (Available in the book: Always Ready PA600)
© Covenant Media Foundation, 800/553-3938
The Heart Of The Matter (Chapter 1)
By Dr. Greg Bahnsen
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christians are often called "believers," while non-Christians are termed "unbelievers." Scripture itself speaks this way: we read that "believers were the more added to the Lord" (Acts 5:14), and that they should not be "unequally yoked together with unbelievers" (2 Cor. 6:14). There are obviously two classes of people distinguished by whether they believe or not. It can rightly be said that what separates Christians from non-Christians is the matter of faith.
Christians believe certain things which non-Christians do not. Christians believe the claims of Christ and the teachings of the Bible to be true, but non-Christians disbelieve them. Christians have faith in Christ and trust His promises; non-Christians do not believe in Him and doubt His word. It is quite natural, then, that the gospel can be called "the word of faith" (Rom. 10:8). Becoming a Christian entails that you "believe in your heart that God raised Him [Christ] from the dead" (v. 9); likewise, "he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is the rewarder of them who diligently seek Him" (Heb. 11:6). Examples could be multiplied. What sets Christians off from non-Christians is the matter of belief or faith.
However, the difference between them is more than that in an important sense, and we need to understand this if we are going to do a faithful job in defending the faith. The Christian claims to "believe" the teachings of Scripture or to have "faith" in the person of Christ[1] because the element of trust is so prominent in our relationship with the Savior. But the Christian actually claims more than simply to believe Christ's claims to be true. The Christian also affirms that he or she "knows" those claims to be true. What is involved in saving faith is more than hope (although that is present) and more than a commitment of will (although that too is present). Job confidently asserted, "I know my Redeemer lives" (Job 19:25). John indicated that he wrote his first epistle so that those "who believe on the name of the Son of God" "may know that you have eternal life" (1 John 5:13). Paul declared that God "has furnished proof" that Jesus will judge the world (Acts 17:31). Jesus promised His disciples that they would "know the truth, and the truth shall set you free" (John 8:32).
In what way does knowledge go beyond belief? Knowledge includes having justification or good reason to support whatever it is you believe. Imagine that I believe there are thirty-seven square miles in a particular city, and imagine also that it just so happens that this claim is accurate - but imagine as well that I simply got this answer by guessing (rather than doing measurements, mathematics or checking an almanac, etc.). I believed something which happened to be true, but we would not say that I had "knowledge" in this case because I had no justification for what I believed. When we claim to know that something is true, we are thereby claiming to have adequate evidence, proof or good reason for it.
The difference between the Christian and the non-Christian is not simply that one believes the Bible and the other does not. People's beliefs can be frivolous, random, or silly. The Christian also claims that there is justification for believing what the Bible says. The non-Christian says, to the contrary, that there is no justification (or adequate justification) for believing the Bible's claims - or, in stronger cases, says that there is justification for disbelieving the Bible's claims. Apologetics amounts to an inquiry into and debate over who is correct on this matter. It involves giving reasons, offering refutations, and answering objections.
End of Chapter-- So now, there's the definition of apologetics. A good place to start, I think. One question down, only a bazillion more to go.
Posted by Shannon at August 26, 2003 01:56 AM | TrackBackWhile the term "apologetics" is most often associated with Christian theology, one can be an apologist for anything. Apologetics is simply a formal defense of a position. If I am not mistaken, one can study apologetics in a seminary and, perhaps, even earn a degree in that field.
Posted by: Joey Wolfe at August 26, 2003 08:18 AMGood to know!
Posted by: Shannon at August 26, 2003 09:59 AMYes, the earliest time I can think of "apology" being used is Plato. One of his works is called "Apology"...basically a defence for his thought. That would a kind of archaic/more scholarly use of the word in general. Using the word to mean "I'm sorry" is a more recent development, and I think a little bit of a misuse, because when I say "I'm sorry" it is more a posture of repentence rather than defence...at least I hope so.
Posted by: Jeannette at August 26, 2003 11:24 AMThe Booth's know the Bahnsen family pretty well.
I'm pretty sure Greg Bahnsen died a few years back- but he is a rather well known figure in the reformed world. Covenant Media Foundation could probably hook you up with some of his stuff. I think Jon Amos even had a Bahnsen article linked on his blog not too long ago. I might be getting names confused- so I'll do some checking.
You're right about most of that, Lisa. Jon's article he linked was by David Bahnsen (Greg's son), but the rest of what you said is correct.
Posted by: Christin at August 26, 2003 11:51 AMYou know, I read that article on Jon's blog a few days ago, but didn't make the connection with the last names! That was a really interesting article by the way. Smart guy.
Posted by: Shannon at August 26, 2003 01:47 PMI am in seminary now and one of the things that we have to study is apologetics. It is basically - (like what has been said before) being able to defend our beliefs as Christians.
You have few basic approaches to apologetics.
1) Classical - uses REASON- these are the methods that have been used through the years to prove the existence of God etc. believing that you can just lay out there for an unbeliever and the facts can convince him/her. C.S. Lewis (who was an apologist) used classical apologetics in "Mere Christianity"
2) Evidentialism -uses FACT -Uses evidence to prove the faith - example of an apologist that uses this method is Josh Mcdowell (evidence that demands a verdict)
3) Presuppositionalism- uses REVELATION -this is a thoroughly "reformed" apologetic developed primarily by a dutch reformed theologian Cornelius Van Til. This view believes that everyone basically believes certain things(presuppositions) before you come into the discussion - and no amounts of evidence is going to sway them unless they are quickened by the Spirit of God. You can see why this one is thoroughly reformed.
4) Fideist - uses FAITH - This one is based roughly on Soren Kierkegaard and was further developed by guys named C. Stephen Evans and Karl Barth. This theory is that God is so transcedent that it requires an "experience" of God to really believe and without that "experience" we cannot really take that "leap of faith" (Kierkegaard) This one appears to the flavor of choice today.
So these are the basic (very basic - I could write pages) ways Christians defend their faith - I hope that it is not too much - more than you asked for. I personally believe in an integrated method using all of the above at different times with different people. I may use several methods in the same conversation or with the same person.
Hope that helps.
Great entry! I love the idea that you will continue the discussions of various theological points in upcoming entries. I learned a lot just reading the comments on this entry!
Posted by: Rus at August 26, 2003 09:48 PMTerrific thoughts, everybody! I am excited about this- I feel like this blog now has a bit more focus and relativity. The feedback is wonderful, and will be essential to really understanding a lot of this stuff. It's like having my own personal tutorial! Keep 'em coming!
Posted by: Shannon at August 26, 2003 11:06 PMShannon, I totally know the feeling you're experiencing, as I also took the road from Baptist to Presbyterian. Apologetics is a tough one to start with, but certainly rewarding. I am a big fan of Bahnsen's apologetics materials, but may I encourage you to mix it a little with the gentle spirit of Jerram Barrs? His apologetics course is available through Covenant Seminary's Access program on DVD (that is, of course, a big investment). And he had also recently written a book on evangelism. Don't be turned off by the cheesy cover though--even he hated it!. Anyway, that class was my favorite in all of seminary--it taught me how to communicate with nonbelievers in a way that none of my previous study ever did.
You can find Bahnsen's debate with athiest Gordon Stein available in realaudio for free at, I think, www.straitgate.org
Also, I recently listened to The White Horse Inn's recent broadcast on the topic of Personal Evangelism, available in real audio at www.whitehorseinn.org It is a 25 min. boradcast, and enjoyable to listen to while you're eating lunch or something. Hope this helps.
Posted by: Matthew Pearson at August 27, 2003 02:26 PM