The "Christ" in "Christian" comes from Jesus' Messiahship. And that Messiahship is an evidential concept. It involves the historical fulfillment of prophecy by a historical individual. Men like Isaiah and Daniel made much of the apologetic value of their prophecies (Isaiah 43:8-13, 46:9-11, Daniel 2:19-28, 5:8-12), including ones Jesus fulfilled. It's ironic that so many people who call themselves Christians are so apathetic and contemptuous toward apologetics and other intellectual matters. That includes a lot of people who acknowledge in principle that apologetics has some significance, but do little or nothing about it in practice. The problem isn't just with fideists.
"It's ironic that so many people who call themselves Christians are so apathetic and contemptuous toward apologetics and other intellectual matters."
ReplyDeleteFWIW my personal conviction is that many, if not most people who call themselves Christians aren't. Just anecdotal of course, but in my "Christian circle" it seems to me that most of the "Christians" I know are moralistic deists, or else some form of Pelagians.
Therefore it's unsurprising to me when I see the characteristics you mentioned. Sad, maybe even shocking sometimes, but not surprising.
Dead-in-their-sins-and-trespasses slaves to unrighteousness can't behave in any other way than in ways that are contradictory to God's revealed will for His people.
By their fruit you shall know them.
Great point, Jason. They scoff at apologetics, then wonder why Christianity is rapidly declining in the US and throughout Western Civilization.
ReplyDeleteWhat we're able to observe outwardly is only that cultural Christianity is declining. The actual Kingdom of Christ cannot be observed and measured.
ReplyDeleteI think you're probably conflating the visible processing church with the invisible actual church. The goats and sheep and wheat and tares live and grow and exist side by side until the Day of the Lord when all will be revealed.
Christianity includes among other beliefs, belief in God as revealed in Scripture, belief in Heaven, in salvation through faith in Christ, and in the divine inspiration of Scripture. Those are some of the critical components, the sine qua non of Christianity. Indications are that the portion of people in Western Civilization who hold those beliefs has declined and is further declining, and that the percentage of those who profess agnosticism, atheism or who have a vague faith that does not include core Christian beliefs (sometimes self-identified as “spiritual but not religious”) is increasing. Therefore, Christianity, not just cultural Christianity, is in decline in Western Civilization, notwithstanding the fact that we don’t know who among professing Christians are actually members of the invisible church.
DeleteI'd need to see the statisitcs. Can you provide data, or reference to a data source for your claims?
DeleteI have included the link to a relatively recent article below. There are many more articles and studies that chronicle the decline, Anecdotally, I traveled to Germany in 2011 and in 2012 with a German woman. She told me in advance that I would encounter many atheists who would challenge my Christian beliefs, and that it would be very difficult for us to find a Bible in a German bookstore. She was right on both counts. Most of the people I talked with there had no interest in God. A lot of the churches we visited had been converted to museums because there were not enough practicing Christians to sustain them as active churches.
Deletehttps://www.pewforum.org/2019/10/17/in-u-s-decline-of-christianity-continues-at-rapid-pace/
I personally doubt the number of actual Christians is declining, though it's theoretically possible. Ultimately all God's elect will be saved, however He may reduce or increase the number of His elect who are instantiated at any given point in time.
DeleteYou have expressed the Arminian response to the doctrine of unconditional election; more specifically, if God determines who the elect are before they were born and will save whomsoever he chooses, what’s the point of evangelization, missions or apologetics?
DeleteFrom that perspective, there is no point to Jason’s initial post in this thread. What’s the difference whether apologetics is being neglected, if God has already decided who he’s going to save or not, regardless? I think it’s clear from Scripture that God not only determines who is saved but also the means by which they are saved, and evangelization and apologetics are a part thereof. In other words, there are real consequences to neglecting apologetics and evangelization. There are good reasons to be concerned about the neglect of apologetics. There are too many passages in the Bible emphasizing the importance of evangelization and defending the faith, to conclude otherwise.
My point is much narrower. I'm simply stating my belief, based on my understanding of God's sovereignty as it is revealed in Scripture, that the number of Christians can't be greater than or less than He has decreed.
DeleteI'm not commenting on secondary causes, but on the primary cause, e.g. God's secret will and decree.
Ultimately there won't be one more or one less Christan in the end than God has determined, period.
As you probably know, John Frame wrote an entire book on apologetics, doing so though believing in the doctrine of election. He begins the book by quoting 1 Peter 3:15, wherein God exhorts believers to always be “prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you.” In your opinion, what is the purpose of that exhortation if God, in any event, will save the elect but not the non-elect? What is the point of apologetics in your opinion?
DeleteYou're moving the goal posts and I'm not going to play along, sorry.
DeleteAmong other things Jason said "It's ironic that so many people who call themselves Christians are so apathetic and contemptuous toward apologetics and other intellectual matters."
I riffed off that point and have continued in this narrower vein since. Please try to keep up with the state of the actual discussion instead of trying to make it about something else.
I am not moving the “goal posts” or attempting to make this about something else (as if somehow it’s wrong to develop a discussion?). If either of us did that, it was you.
DeleteYou say you riffed off Jason’s point, so what? I didn’t respond to your riff off of Jason’s point. So why are you even mentioning it?
Our discussion began with you replying directly to me. The relationship between apologetics and election became the topic when you responded to my post about apologetics by asserting that ultimately, all God's elect will be saved. In light of that point, “I asked “what’s the difference whether apologetics is being neglected, if God has already decided who he’s going to save or not, regardless?” In my most recent post, I asked “In your opinion, what is the purpose of that exhortation if God, in any event, will save the elect but not the non-elect? What is the point of apologetics in your opinion?” So how is that a goalpost move, how is that me trying to make this about something else, when it is essentially the same question I asked four posts ago?
If you disagree that God's will and decree is ultimately the cause of salvation for any human being please make that case, otherwise I think I'm done here.
Delete"professing" not "processing"...autocorrect fail!
ReplyDelete1) Any suggestions on finding a church interested in apologetics? My last one had the most interest, and it boiled down to one class of many that touched gently on several arguments (morality, kalam...), that lasted 6-8 weeks, and was, at most, 45 minutes. I moved during covid and haven't been motivated to try again.
ReplyDelete2) Thoughts on finding groups that are interested?
You can't have groups without individuals making up those groups. And given how few individuals are involved in apologetic work at a significant level, you aren't going to find many groups (churches, local apologetics organizations, etc.) who are doing the work. You'll occasionally see some apologetics of an introductory nature in a church, especially at the earliest steps of an introductory level, but it's going to be rare to find people doing more than that.
DeleteSomething like the internet or the publishing of books can give people a false impression, since finding people who are a small fraction of one percent of the population is so easy to do in those contexts, and you can find them in a large quantity. So, people doing apologetics beyond an introductory level can be found on a large number of web sites, for example, but those web sites probably represent only a small fraction of one percent of the population. Notice, for instance, how few people on Facebook and other such places online do apologetic work to any significant extent. The quantity of apologetic work being done on Facebook is large when you add up everything being done by everybody involved. But the percentage of people participating in doing that work (or even reading it, linking it, encouraging the people involved in it, etc.) is appallingly small. The large majority of people, including the large majority of Evangelicals and the large majority of people who are truly Christians, are far more interested in posting photographs of their family, telling jokes, talking about food, discussing health issues, telling people about their career, addressing politics, etc. It's not just that they don't do much in apologetics. They're also highly negligent about God, theology, ethics, and other matters that are more important than what they typically discuss. But they'll be liked and respected more if they do things like post photographs and tell jokes. And that sort of social status is something they're encouraged to pursue as a high priority from the earliest years of their childhood onward. Even the large majority of Christians haven't outgrown it.
I've written elsewhere about the state of our culture. I've also written about the importance of apologetics and some arguments that can be used to persuade people of its importance. If you read the first post just linked, that will give you some idea of what you're up against. If you read the second one, you'll get an idea of why apologetics is important and some ways you can go about convincing other people to be more interested in it.
Given the current state of our culture, you probably will occasionally find some groups in your area who are addressing apologetics, but the large majority of those groups will be addressing the issues at an introductory level. You might, on rare occasions, come across groups doing apologetic work of a more advanced nature (Reasonable Faith chapters, groups working on university campuses, etc.). But a problem you'll often encounter with those groups is that they're overly focused on atheism. I've written about that problem elsewhere.
There are exceptions, but the general principle I would follow would be to focus on individuals in your area while being involved in groups outside your area. Modern technology, like the telephone and the internet, make it much easier to find groups of people with whom you have common ground, since the technology gives you access to so many more people. Keep looking for local groups addressing apologetics beyond an introductory level, but don't expect to find much, and keep your local focus on individuals. Have conversations with relatives, neighbors, people in your church, etc. who are interested in the relevant issues. Even if they aren't yet interested in apologetics or aren't interested beyond an introductory level, try to move them in the direction of maturing in that context. You may never get to a point where there's enough interest in your church or in your city to justify doing something like teaching an apologetics class, but at least you'll have a good influence on some individuals.
DeleteMeanwhile, outside the area where you live, it's easy to find groups you can join online, conferences you can attend, etc. Because of the state of our culture, and because of the nature of life, it's going to be more efficient to put more of your focus on people outside the region where you live. If you can easily discuss an apologetic issue with a hundred people at a web site any day of the week, whereas it's difficult to find more than one or two people willing to have such discussions in the town where you live, then giving more attention to that online context is more efficient and a wiser use of your resources. We apply the same kind of reasoning in other areas of our lives: having pastors deliver sermons to a congregation collectively rather than addressing each member of the congregation individually, even though the latter would be more personal, would involve more face-to-face interaction, and so on; driving half an hour away from your home to work a job rather than making a living by doing work for your neighbors; looking for the best doctor to perform surgery on you rather than limiting your options to local doctors; etc.
Keep in mind, also, that the nature of life is such that what we do in the context of local church meetings constitutes only a small percentage of our lives. Even if you had good reason to do something like attend or teach an apologetics class in your church, the vast majority of your apologetic work ought to be occurring outside the local church.
If you're in some sort of leadership position (parenting, pastoring a church, or whatever), then you're going to have more opportunities and influence accordingly. But the people under your influence are going to be influenced by other sources as well, so there's only so much you can do. Even if you view something like your family or a church you pastor as a group you're involved with in the context of apologetics, it's not as though every member of that group joined it with the intention of addressing apologetics. So, it's a group of a different nature than what I was focused on in the paragraphs before this one.