Tags
answer, Christianity, defense, faith, fideism, Francis Schaeffer, knowledge
Knowledge precedes faith.~Francis Schaeffer
Many people think that faith and knowledge are opposites. Atheists often attack Christianity by criticizing a “faith” that they say is not supported by, or even contradicted by, evidence. Some Christians seem to agree with them. They support their view with verses like 2 Corinthians 5:7 for we walk by faith, not by sight (ESV).
Here’s the problem: to interpret this verse in such a way, one has to take it out of context.
To interpret faith as meaning a blind leap of faith, one has to ignore the passages surrounding this verse, ignore the context of Scripture as a whole, and ignore the original language the Bible was written in. Let’s start with the language. The Greek word translated into English as faith is pistis. Here is what Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary says about pistis:
…primarily, “firm persuasion,” a conviction based upon hearing (akin to peitho, “to persuade”)…
All this stands in contrast to belief in its purely natural exercise, which consists of an opinion held in good “faith” without necessary reference to its proof….
In the original language faith is not good “faith” held without rhyme or reason. Faith without evidence, or in contradiction to evidence, has no basis in the Bible. In fact, because our English word “faith” has thus been twisted, it might be better to translate pistis as “trust.” Only a fool would trust what he/she does not know. Christians who proclaim a blind leap of faith are the blind leading the blind.
This erroneous view of faith has made Christianity an easy target for antitheists. All they have to do to rob Christians of credibility is to set up a straw man argument against us, based on this idiotic view of faith!
In fact, if we read 2 Corinthians 5:7 in full context Paul says,
2 Corinthians 5:1-10 ESV (emphasis mine)
For we know that if the tent that is our earthly home is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this tent we groan, longing to put on our heavenly dwelling, if indeed by putting it on we may not be found naked. For while we are still in this tent, we groan, being burdened—not that we would be unclothed, but that we would be further clothed, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee. So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, for we walk by faith, not by sight. Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.
Paul first gives an argument from desire, arguing that the believer knows he has eternal life because he longs for the eternal. Secondly, he says we have the Holy Spirit as a guarantee. The Christian believer has a rational belief in God on the basis that the very Spirit of the Almighty God lives within him or her! This faith may be “blind” in the sense that God is not seen, but the Believer has more than enough evidence that God is real. It is no leap of faith.
The faithful know that God is real, but what about the unbeliever? Without a direct experiential encounter with God, the Christian must attempt to show that he is real. If Christianity is true, we should find some evidence for it. With the help of the Holy Spirit, if the Christian will discipline themself to learn how to defend the faith with evidence, the skeptic may be convinced.
Apologetics is the Biblical way to witness to the skeptic. The term “apologetics” is derived from the Greek apologia. It does not mean Christians need to apologize for their faith. Apologia is translated as “answer” or “defense” in 1 Peter 3:15.
Since knowledge precedes faith, the Christian’s primary mission is to know God and to make Him known.
John 17:3 ESV
And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.
Hey liked the post man. The only thing I would semi-disagree with (or instead I should say would love some clarification of) is that it almost sounded as if you were saying the move of the spirit is best for in the church, but apologetics is best for evangelism. I think we have also changed what apologetics meant since biblical times. Now it means basically the scientific, historic, etc.proof. Basically secular reasons for believing. Which is fine, but when the Bible so often mentions this concept, i think it had a more base meaning. As in, we need to have a reason for our faith… even if it is a supernatural one. Like I know you have read my book and know all the scriptures I give where Paul states that it was the movement of the Spirit, the manifestation of miracles, and God’s manifested presence that got people saved, often in direct opposition to Paul’s wisdom and intellectual ability. Though I think what we call apologetics today is definitely part of the equation for evangelism, I do not believe it was the main factor in any of the apostles evangelistic ministries.
I believe they had reasons ready when people wanted to know why the supernatural was happening, but I don’t believe they approached people first with an intellectual approach, and then started to try an manifest the supernatural after the unsaved were convinced. Which seems to be the main push amongst most apologist: Intellect first, spirituality second once the intellect has been convinced. I say this only in that it almost sounded as though you were saying the proof of the holy spirit was evidence for we who are saved, but for the doubting unbeliever intellectual proof must be presented. Basically in the church the supernatural is proof, but for evangelism we should use modern apologetics. (Though I think I know you well enough to know that isn’t actually what you were saying in that exact sense.) Like I said before I completely agree that modern apologetics is part of the equation, but from what I can find in scripture, it occurs in almost the reverse order of what many apologists purport. In that the apostles would either preach the Gospel alone (which is a wholly supernatural message), then miracles would occur, then rationalizations, or simply the supernatural would manifest (think Peter and his shadow healing as he walked by) then the rational explanation of why it occurred. Basically if someone who has been blind since birth can see, people are open to the rationalization afterwards. Not that I don’t think the intellectual proof can open doors and cause people to listen and, even if it is the secondary element, needs to be present to rationally give reason to the primary element of His presence. But I fear that in the attempt to find a way to convert the intellectually minded lost, we have almost played more to the intellect than understanding that we can surpass intellectual boundaries.
The reason I say this is you are one of the few (and by that I am guessing there are others out there, but to be honest you are the only one I have actually come across lol) but you are one of the few apologists that actually believe in the active and constant flow of the Spirit, both within the Church and in evangelism. And when I say believe I do not mean intellectually agree with, but that they are actively proud of it, seek it, and experience it. And I think this situation points to something a little deeper than simply chance. I think it points to the one flaw in modern apologetics, that it can sometimes lead to a more intellectual religion, than an actual spiritual relationship with our Father.
I hear plenty apologists say it is possible to experience the supernatural, or to have the Holy Spirit move through believers in a tangible manner is also a possibility, but almost none who genuinely seek it as earnestly as they do an intellectual understanding. Which I think is a great issue. We are to be FIRST spiritual beings desiring to experience our spiritual Father, then secondly earthly physical and intellectual. When those two get switched I feel the church loses its power not gains more. However I must add context to say that if we also get so loopy in our seeking of the supernatural that the earthly or intellectual part of us gets neglected and rots away, then too is the Church weakened. God created us to be spirits with a physical body (in which I include the soul realm for this particular instance though it could be considered a bit of both). If we neglect either then we are neglecting a precious gift from our Father and defy who we were created to be. But I always think if I HAD to choose just ONE. The spiritual aptitude is always the most important. A complete idiot with the Holy Spirit manifesting can do more than a thousand scholars who agree that the Holy Spirit exists and should be moving.
I know I am saying nothing new to you. And in reality this was way more writing than the reply required, but I read what you wrote and it did it’s job and got me thinking on a larger scale than just this post. And though I know how you meant what you wrote I hear the same thing from many of these brilliant Christians (not sarcastically said) and yet they mean it in a different manner. They do almost beleive in the dichotomy of Church and evangelism. What is good in one is not good in the other. I don’t know that I agree with that. I don’t know that the Bible agrees with that. So I am not arguing with you (as you probably know ^_^) but merely adding a different perspective, a bunny trail if you will.
Bro, you’re always jumping the gun on me! This is the first post of a series, so I intended to get to a lot of what you’re talking about in future posts. You’re right though, that apologetics includes any defense of the faith — intellectual, supernatural, etc. The best apologetic is for the Christian to live a holy life. I also see what you mean that it seems like I’m saying the Holy Spirit is for the Church, and apologetics is for unbelievers. Part of that is just the fact that this is only part of a series, so I’m not putting everything out there in this post.
Basically, the main point of this post was to dispell the idea that there is no intellectual aspect of Christianity. Of course, the Holy Spirit and God’s supernatural power is vital for the faith of both Christians and unbelievers, since it is the Spirit’s role to convict the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment. For the purposes of this post, the indwelling Spirit of God is more than sufficient evidence for the Christian, but to simply tell a skeptic, “I know God is real because He lives within me,” is not a very convincing witness. For those with questions, as much as possible, the Church must have rational answers.
Apologetics is also important for the faith of Believers, since even Believers have doubts sometimes. So many people who have had a genuine experience of God end up leaving the Church because when they have doubts, pastors and other leaders tell them, “You’ve just got to have more faith!” or “You’ve got to know in your knower.” This is unacceptable.
So it’s not either the supernatural or intellectually rigorous faith — whether in the Church or oustside the Church, we need both. But like I said, I’ve got some more posts on the way, and I don’t want to give away too much in the comments.
Lol oh I know what you personally believe. Heck like is said in my parenthesis I was just wanting you to further elaborate on what you thought… which as it seems you were planning on anyways. Hey not my fault I actually read you posts and reply ^_^. Maybe there should be a warning before that this is one of a series or something lol. You know my habits and that I like discussing these kinds of things ^_^. I need a following posts will incur disclaimer! lol Else I will want to chat, debate and talk with you about it. You know this maaan. Well then, I await future posts with baited breath.
Reblogged this on Captivated by Christ's Blog – Linden Wolfe and commented:
Well worth reading!
Thank you, sir! You’re a gentleman and a scholar.