Another resource

Just wanted to pass along another preacher I've found on sermonaudio.com that you may want to give a listen when you have the time. His name is Don Fortner. Another sermon series that I highly recommend is by Steve Hartland called, "Decisions, discernment, and the will of God". It's a 4 part series, and is well worth the listen. Both these men can be found in the "sermons by speaker" list on sermonaudio. Hope you enjoy.

Presuppostionalism......an Approach to Apologetics

A few days ago, I offered the commentators on this blog, the opportunity to suggest some topics they would like to discuss. "graceupongrace" has graciously (pun intended) offered up this one for us. These are his/her words for us:

What do you think of when the word "apologetics" comes to mind? New believers who are unfamiliar with apologetics may immediately think of the word apology, which in modern English is used when someone is sorry about something. But in Christianity, apologetics refers to the defense of Christianity, coming from the Greek word "apologia," which means the defense of something. Thus, for many Christians, including many viewers of this website, "apologetics" brings to mind prominent Christians like Josh McDowell ("Evidence That Demands a Verdict") or Lee Strobel ("The Case for Christ"), and their rational arguments for Christianity.

However, what many Christians do not realize is that there is a debate about the proper methods to defend the Christian faith. Cornelius Van Til (1895-1987), former longtime professor at Westminster Theological Seminary, hammered out a method of apologetics known as "presuppositionalism," which has grown in popularity in Reformed circles through the years. In this post, I will endeavor the arduous task of explaining presuppositionalism as simply as possible.

As a preface to the explanation, I will outline a few things that are necessary to understanding presuppositionalism. There are four basic states in the history of mankind. First is creation: God, who is both infinite and personal, created man as a sinless, yet finite, being. Although he is finite, as all other created beings such as animals are, man IS personal, unlike the rest of creation (meaning he is spiritual, rational, moral and emotional). This is the Creator/ creation/ mankind distinction: the Creator is infinite and personal, but His creation is all finite and impersonal, except for man, who is finite yet finite. (I will discuss what it means for man to be finite soon).

The second stage is the fall. Adam's sin led all men to be born into sin, as "in Adam all sinned" (Romans 5). Thus, no longer was man in perfect communion with God; instead, in his fallen state, he is "hostile to God" (Romans 8), his every thought is evil (Genesis 6:5), and God's Word is foolishness to him (1 Corinthians 1:18). By the way, what exactly was Adam/Eve's sin? 1 Corinthians 10:9 warns, "We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did and were destroyed by serpents"; the "some of them," here, refers to Adam and Eve, of course. Eve sinned when she seriously weighed the options the serpent gave her. "Well, God says I shouldn't eat from this tree, but the serpent says I'll have more knowledge, etc..." She was not fully relying on God anymore: she was being independent in her thinking and was putting God to the test. This is a crucial point for the upcoming discussion on apologetics.

The third stage is redemption. The cross secured the redemption of all those who believe, and through Christ, true knowledge, holiness and righteousness are being regained (Colossians 3:10, Ephesians 4:22-24). However, this does not mean that man becomes perfect immediately. Instead, he continues to struggle with sin (Romans 7), though he is no longer a slave to sin.

The final stage is glorification. In heaven, Christians will become sinless again, and indeed not even able to sin. In heaven we will always be thinking God's thoughts! However, man will remain finite beings, as only God is infinite.

With these things in mind, let us now consider what it means for man to be "finite."

1. Because we are finite, we are dependent on God for the knowledge he has revealed, and cannot get that knowledge independently; thus we should not follow the world's fallen thinking. "8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. 9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, 10 and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority." – Colossians 2:8-9

"17 Now this I say and testify in the Lord, that you must no longer walk as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds. 18 They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart. 19 They have become callous and have given themselves up to sensuality, greedy to practice every kind of impurity." – Ephesians 4:17-18

2. Because we are finite, we as Christians should instead take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ, as that is the only way to truly know things. "We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ." 2 Corinthians 10:5

"Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God." 1 Corinthians 2:12

3. But because we are finite, even if we're Christians, we can't understand everything. "The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law." – Deuteronomy 29:29

How does this rely to apologetics?

Presuppositionalism, at its heart, says that when we defend our faith, we should do so, first and foremost, from the Bible instead of relying on arguments which appeal to man's reason (i.e, arguments from history, science, etc), because the Bible is the ultimate source of truth, and man, in his fallen state, cannot be a proper judge of truth. "To trust any principle as more basic than total dependence on God Is to suppose that there is another authority over Christ" (Every Thought Captive).

If we are not dependent on the Bible in apologetics, then we are basically saying we are (1) committed to independence, just as nonbelievers are and just as Eve committed herself to independence when she considered eating the apple, which cannot be justified, because how can you know that you can discover truth on your own? Many other people do the same thing (search for truth independently) and reach different conclusions. We are also (2) buying into the myth of neutrality, that you can find truth if you try to be very objective. The truth is, no one is neutral. "30 Whoever is not with me is against me." Matthew 12:30;

Common question #1: We know that one cannot justify independence, but how can a Christian justify his dependence on the Bible and Christ? One knows the Bible is God's Word "by the testimony of the Holy Spirit and the redeeming work of Christ. God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and Scripture all verify themselves and each other for there can be no authority to which the ultimate authorities appeal. As far as the believer is concerned, there is no one greater by whom God may swear to His authority than Himself" (Every Thought Captive)

Common question #2: Isn't a commitment to Jesus itself initially based on a commitment to independence (being your own judge of truth)? "The Christian realizes this is not the case for he did not commit himself to dependence on God after an independent decision to do so. He was given the grace of God's regeneration apart from his own will. He was thereby enabled to commit himself to total dependence. (Romans 9:16). There is no independent human choice underlying commitment to Christ" (Every Thought Captive)

A Suggested Structure for Biblical Apologetics (the following comes completely from Every Thought Captive):

A. If an issue comes up that gives rise to the presentation of the gospel and an opportunity to defend the Christian faith, first admit your faith commitment, and then answer from dependent certainty or dependent uncertainty

1. Dependent Certainty: If the answer is known, give biblical answer and biblical evidence for the particular issue in question.

2. Dependent Uncertainty: If the answer is not known, give justification of your ignorance and show why Christianity is no less certain.

B. If the unbeliever is not convinced, show him that his disbelief is founded on his commitment to independence, and that this commitment to independence cannot be justified. He will have either established absolute certainty or total uncertainty.

1. Absolute Certainty: If the unbeliever is certain that the evidence is against Christianity, show him that he has not and cannot know enough to be sure he understands his evidence correctly.

2. Total Uncertainty: If the unbeliever is uncertain because there is not enough evidence to be sure, show him that he has not and cannot know enough to be sure that he must be uncertain.

C. Then, challenge the unbeliever to recognize his unjustifiable commitment to independence as the source of his futility, and present the gospel message of repentance and faith.

Remember:

A. When talking with unbelievers, we must first admit our faith commitment – we should not use independent reason to justify our beliefs.

B. The Bible is true whether one believes it or not; Romans 1 says men suppress the truth, and no matter how well we may do, not everyone will come to Christ.

1. 65 And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father." John 6:65

2. "31 He said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.'" Luke 16:31

3. 29 Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." John 20:29

4. "49 And when those who were around him saw what would follow, they said, "Lord, shall we strike with the sword?" 50 And one of them struck the servant of the high priest and cut off his right ear. 51 But Jesus said, "No more of this!" And he touched his ear and healed him." Luke 22:29-51; the Bible does not say whether this man came to know Christ.

5. Luke 23:43; one man on a cross next to Jesus believed on Christ and was admitted into heaven, the other did not.

6. 11 While He was on the way to Jerusalem, He was passing between Samaria and Galilee. 12 As He entered a village, ten leprous men who stood at a distance met Him; 13 and they raised their voices, saying, "Jesus, Master, have mercy on us!" 14 When He saw them, He said to them, " Go and show yourselves to the priests." And as they were going, they were cleansed. 15 Now one of them, when he saw that he had been healed, turned back, glorifying God with a loud voice, 16 and he fell on his face at His feet, giving thanks to Him. And he was a Samaritan. 17 Then Jesus answered and said, "Were there not ten cleansed? But the nine-where are they? 18 " Was no one found who returned to give glory to God, except this foreigner?" 19 And He said to him, "Stand up and go; your faith has made you well." Luke 17:11-19; only one healed leper came to Christ.

C. God has promised to use His word, that it will not return void (Hebrews 4:12, Isaiah 55:11).

D. Circular reasoning is impossible to avoid by anybody, but this does not invalidate one's approach. One apologist states, "Unless we are larger than God, we cannot reason about Him by any other way than by a transcendental or circular argument." He refers to this as "spiral reasoning. "We must go around and round a thing to see more of its dimensions and to know more about it, in general, unless we are larger than that which we are investigating" (Rushdoony, By What Standard?). Thus, "Man seeks to understand the infinite (he has eternity in his heart), but he must do it in a way consistent with his nature – in dependence upon His creator."

NOW:

I am not sure if my explanation of presuppositionalism is helpful or not, because I have not explained it to many people before. So you can help me now by asking any questions you have and I will try to answer them to the best of my ability.

I also highly recommend Dr. Richard L. Pratt's Every Thought Captive, from which I quoted several times (I don't have the page numbers because I've loaned the book to someone else, but I had copied several of these quotes down before). Another good book is Dr. John Frame's Apologetics to the Glory of God.

As a footnote : An excellent apologist for reformed doctrine is James White of Alpha and Omega Ministries. allofgrace (blog moderator)

My, how we could use more of this kind of preaching today

Over the last couple of days, I've been listening to some sermons online at sermonaudio.com. If you don't have this site bookmarked, you should add it. There's a wealth of sermons on mp3 format from preachers and teachers all over the country. I discovered one of those rare gifts that God gives to his church in Henry Mahan....a no-nonsense, straightforward preacher of the gospel. I've been greatly blessed hearing him preach the gospel of sovereign grace in the Lord Jesus Christ. There are several pages of his sermons, but there are three I would highly recommend: "They Cry Peace When No Peace", "Salvation is of the Lord", "The Missing Note in Present-Day Preaching"....for those of you interested in a "relevant" message...the last one should fill the bill...in fact I would say it's relevance is timeless. You can find his messages on sermonaudio.com by clicking on "sermons by speaker" in the menu on the left side of the home page...his name is in the list of speakers, listed alphabetically. Enjoy.