(This post is a follow-up from Lesson 1 in our ongoing series on apologetics at GCC).
“Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes.” (Proverbs 26:4–5)
A few basics
What is truth? This is the inevitable question that the Christian confronts in this world. Is there a God? Is humanity sinful? Is there a way people can be saved? These are decidedly spiritual questions, though other more abstract questions persist as well: Who am I? Why am I here? How can I know things? What is the point of all this? These are questions with a more philosophical feel, yet they are deeply theological, nonetheless. The Christian must maintain a faithful (that is, biblical) witness to the world concerning these matters, but that does not imply that we speak into a vacuum. After all, the world provides answers to these questions as well, answers which are often delivered with all the force and zeal one might expect from an impassioned sermon.
The above passage from Proverbs is instructive in this exchange: a Christian does not speak with the foolish person according to the foolish person’s own terms, as such an exchange would plunge both into foolishness. If I were to claim there is no God and then insist that Christians engage me on my own terms in this argument (that is, my presupposition that God does not exist), it would be a grievous error for the Christian to cede to those terms and engage in such an argument. Yet Christians all too often cede just such ground when maintaining a faithful witness. Christians often will try to reason with the world according to its own worldview, which cripples our witness from the outset. At the same time, the Christian does engage the foolish person “according to his folly,” which is to engage the foolish person’s truth claims in order to expose them as error. Only in Christ do we find truth, and every other truth claim borrows from the Christian worldview yet ultimately fails to be consistent and coherent in its application.[i]
The Truth
If this stark analysis seems, well, stark, we might consider how Scripture frames such arguments. Christ maintained that truth is found only in Him, as Christ is the very embodiment of truth: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). Christ is the truth, and truth is found from no other source. When the Jewish and Roman rejection of Christ rose to its predestined moment of finality, Christ (having been arrested and bound) informed Pilate: “for this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice” (John 18:37). Christ is truth and bears witness to truth, and all those who are of God (the elect) listen to this truth.
The world does not listen (John 7:7; cf. 6:44) in no small part because its deeds are evil, as John observes: “and this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil” (John 3:19). Pilate’s response to Christ’s truth claims is quite revealing in this regard. Christ made clear to Pilate: “For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice” (John 18:37). Speaking with words familiar to many subsequent secular worldviews, Pilate sarcastically replied to Christ’s statement by asking: “What is truth?” (John 18:38). Pilate is not sincere in this question—his response is not faith seeking understanding, or any such ostensibly noble aim. Pilate rejects truth, even rejecting the ability to truly know truth. Many today follow in the footsteps of Pilate on this front, rejecting truth, any knowledge of truth, and the truth of Christ. For the faithful Christian witness, however, we must follow Christ by declaring the truth.
The Critique
How does a Christian critique the perspectives of the world?
This may sound like a negative approach, and to a certain extent, it is (though I would prefer the term “defensive” rather than “negative”). Let us assume that I voice the conclusion that the sky is blue, while you respond that the sky red. Not only is it red, but you insist that it is not a sky at all, and furthermore you insist that we cannot be sure that we could comprehend the existence of a sky if such a thing even existed (to say nothing of its color!). At this point, it will not do to simply reiterate that the sky is, in face, blue (as true as that statement remains). At this point, I must also address why your contention about the sky is false. To do that, I must ask some probing questions in order to examine your position and presuppositions (and thus, your worldview). In giving a summary of this apologetic approach, Toby Sumpter observed two foundational claims: first that “everything in the universe is contingent or dependent on God and this includes our thinking about anything in the universe,” and second that “unbelievers are not happy about the fact that God holds everything together” (video here). The Christian worldview seeks to glorify God in all things (1 Cor 10:31; Ps 86:12), while the worldview of the world suppresses the truth of God in unrighteousness (Rom 1:18–25)—these biblical truths undergird this approach.
The Christian cannot say that the sky is blue because God has created it so, but then acquiesce or empathize with worldviews committed to the contrary. It will not do to claim the sky can be both blue and red or find commonality in the fact that grass is still green—untruth must be confronted, and truth must be championed (2 Cor 10:4). Finally, we do not contend that our biblical reasoning based on the triune God is merely the best approach for Christians, but we further maintain that it is the only logical basis for all reasoning and knowledge. Without the God who has spoken, it would be quite untenable to make any ultimate truth claims or knowledge claims (one of many reasons for the popularity of solipsism in common dialogue: the perspective that all knowledge outside one’s own mind is nonviable). Christianity is not a valid worldview or even the best possible worldview, it is the only feasibly consistent worldview there is (hence, the impossibility of contrary). The triune God is the necessary precondition for all knowledge and truth claims.
It is important to note worldview at this point precisely because we are framing how to maintain a faithful Christian witness in this world. On that front, the Christian may feel that the issues raised against their witness are simply too many to deal with. For example, consider the following seemingly-unrelated news headlines: a member of a foreign government is put on criminal trial for posting portions of the book of Romans on social media; debates surrounding abortion threaten to divide churches and families; drag queens are sharing graphic sexual material with small children during library reading hours; etc. These issues may seem disparate and unrelated, and therefore our response as Christians is often unsteady and hesitant. The Christian wants to present an effective Christian witness to the world, yet they often feel assailed on too many fronts. What is vital to understand is that all of these otherwise-unrelated issues are products of a particular worldview. That worldview has certain assumptions and presuppositions upon which it operates, and those presuppositions will be flawed if the worldview is not the Christian (that is, biblical) worldview. The Christian task is to expose those flaws while presenting the truth of the Christian worldview.
[i] For further, see John M. Frame, Apologetics to the Glory of God: An Introduction (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 1994); Greg L. Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended, ed. Joel McDurmon (Powder Springs: American Vision Press, 2010); Cornelius Van Til, Christian Apologetics (Phillipsburg: P & R Publishing, 2003).
SDG,
Josh Howard
Josh Howard serves as the Elder/Pastor at Grace Community Church in Battle Creek, MI, co-hosts the Good Doctrine Podcast and The Age to Come Webcast, and is an alumni of Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (PhD, ThM). Josh has also authored The Exorcism of Satan (forthcoming, Free Grace Press), The King's Command (forthcoming, College & Clayton Press), and A Primer for Conflict (forthcoming, Founders Press).