All reasoning begins with axioms. We assume that syllogisms produce truth. We assume that the world is as we perceive it.
And it’s the nature of logic and reason that they must proceed from axioms. It’s how God made our minds work.
We cannot imagine any other kind of logic. It’s hard-wired in our brains.
Now axioms, by definition, are neither provable nor disprovable. If they could be, they would not be true axioms. This doesn’t mean that they are neither true nor false; just that the truth of the axiom cannot be determined by formal logic.
From a preacher story about the Alaska Highway.
Logic takes a given truth and infers other truths from that given. There is a sense, therefore, in which all such inferred truths are simply other ways of expressing the axioms assumed. Therefore, you’d better pick your axioms carefully. They ultimately create your worldview.
If I begin my worldview with God or the scriptures as axiomatic, I’m not being circular: I’m just being honest about my assumptions.
Just so, if I begin my worldview by denying the reality of all that cannot be proved scientifically, I’m assuming — not proving. The question is whether I’m honest enough to admit it. The problem is that most people claim to be reasoning from pure Reason when in fact they are reasoning from unprovable assumptions.
Now, if axioms cannot be proved, how do we pick? In one sense, we cannot. On the other hand, regardless of all the theory, we can compare the resulting worldviews and lives led. Those who build their houses on a rock live very differently from those who build on sand. The rains and the floods do come.
Alvin Plantinga and other Christian philosophers argue the case for Christianity subjectively. Either I experience it or I do not. Most non-Calvinist Protestants reject such thinking out of hand, demanding objective proof — that is, insisting that Christianity meet the standards of science and so revealing an Enlightenment worldview that is ultimately anti-Christian.
Hence, the Enlightenment/Christian-ish perspective sometimes denies present day miracles, denies the knowability of God’s answers to prayers, sometimes even denies a personal relationship with Jesus.
On the other hand, the Enlightenment/Christian-ish perspective also assumes the scriptures to be true, but true in a scientific sense. After all, surely God wrote the text to answer the questions of 21st Century followers of the Enlightenment! And therefore Genesis 1 is surely to be read as science. Our worldview demands that truth be scientific truth, and so we tell God what kind of truth he may tell us.
Hence, if the world were proved to be billions of years old, those of this worldview would consider the scriptures to have failed and faith to be meaningless — and this is taught by countless Christians with an Enlightenment worldview. Science is assumed paramount and as defining true truth.
But this is NOT how the scriptures present themselves.
(1Co 2:14-16 ESV) 14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. 16 “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ.
Paul insists that spiritual truths cannot be known except by the Spirit. Objective knowledge of God and his self-revelation is thus impossible. It’s revealed by the Spirit — which not everyone has. Hence, how can we debate the irreligious philosopher? He does not have the Spirit and so cannot know God.
And so the meaning of knowledge changes. “Knowledge” becomes experiential as empowered by the Spirit. No longer do we just assume that the best, truest knowledge is objective and scientific. Rather, we are taught there is a subjective knowledge that is more important and even more true.
(Joh 14:16-17 ESV) 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, 17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.
Believers, followers of Jesus, have access to knowledge and experience that others cannot have.
This, of course, forces a reconsideration of the entire apologetics project. It’s not so much about the science as the experience. And evangelism is thus more about sharing experiences than proof texts and syllogisms.
If the claims of Christianity are true, and if I’m a Christian, I must be able to testify to the world about my experiences as a Christian.
(Act 20:18-21 ESV) 18 And when they came to him, he said to them: “You yourselves know how I lived among you the whole time from the first day that I set foot in Asia, 19 serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and with trials that happened to me through the plots of the Jews; 20 how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you in public and from house to house, 21 testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.”
(Joh 15:26-27 ESV) 26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. 27 And you also will bear witness, because you have been with me from the beginning.”
Today, we are not witnesses of the physical Jesus’ presence on earth — we weren’t there — but we are witnesses of what Jesus does today — in us, through us, and among us.
(Joh 13:35 ESV) 35 “By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
The evidence for the truth of Christianity is changed lives and the church as an alternative society in which people live an other-worldly love.
(Joh 17:23 ESV) 23 I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me.
The church and the lives lived by Christians are the ultimate apologetic. Even if we prove the existence of God to an absolute certainty with a high-def video of the Creation, that only gets us to Deism. To get to Christianity, the church must be the church and Christians must be Christians. And when that happens, the evidence is there. And when that doesn’t happen, well, we’re converting people to what? Not Christianity because Christianity changes people to love and to be united.
Now, if this sounds like the earlier post on Presuppositional Apologetics, you are right. The point of that school of thought is that we cannot give the Christian experience to non-Christians. They cannot know what we know and who we know as we know.
(Rom 8:16 NET) 16 The Spirit himself bears witness to our spirit that we are God’s children.
Only Christians experience the direct testimony of the Spirit.
Some translations prefer “with our spirit” rather than “to our spirit.” The NET Bible translators strongly disagree —
Or possibly “with.” ExSyn 160–61, however, notes the following: “At issue, grammatically, is whether the Spirit testifies alongside of our spirit (dat. of association), or whether he testifies to our spirit (indirect object) that we are God’s children. If the former, the one receiving this testimony is unstated (is it God? or believers?). If the latter, the believer receives the testimony and hence is assured of salvation via the inner witness of the Spirit. The first view has the advantage of a σύν– (sun-) prefixed verb, which might be expected to take an accompanying dat. of association (and is supported by NEB, JB, etc.). But there are three reasons why πνεύματι (pneumati) should not be taken as association: (1) Grammatically, a dat. with a σύν– prefixed verb does not necessarily indicate association. This, of course, does not preclude such here, but this fact at least opens up the alternatives in this text. (2) Lexically, though συμμαρτυρέω (summartureo) originally bore an associative idea, it developed in the direction of merely intensifying μαρτυρέω (martureo). This is surely the case in the only other NT text with a dat. (Rom 9:1). (3) Contextually, a dat. of association does not seem to support Paul’s argument: ‘What standing has our spirit in this matter? Of itself it surely has no right at all to testify to our being sons of God’ [C. E. B. Cranfield, Romans [ICC], 1:403]. In sum, Rom 8:16 seems to be secure as a text in which the believer’s assurance of salvation is based on the inner witness of the Spirit. The implications of this for one’s soteriology are profound: The objective data, as helpful as they are, cannot by themselves provide assurance of salvation; the believer also needs (and receives) an existential, ongoing encounter with God’s Spirit in order to gain that familial comfort.”
(emphasis mine). That is far removed from traditional Church of Christ teaching. But it’s what the Bible says.
And so how do I convince someone of a purely subjective experience? Well, how do I convince someone that I love my wife? I say so, but more important, I live so. And then no one doubts it. They can see the impact on my life and her life.
Just so, how do I persuade someone that Jesus is resurrected, forgives, saves, and has called me into mission with him as part of his Kingdom? Well, I live it.
And I tell the stories that such a life will necessarily produce.
In short, we cannot pretend that the truth of Christianity is established by irrefutable proofs on its own, and that how we live is simply between us and God. The truth of Christianity is established by how we live. And if we fail to live it, there is no plan B.
We cannot reach into our bag of logic and syllogisms and persuade the world of the truth of a Christianity that does not change lives and establish a Christ-like, cruciform church. There is no such thing.
Then there’s the opposite extreme that says…
“If you have not felt any warm feelings in your heart, then you are not saved”.
Many were relieved to find out from our RM pioneers that salvation does not depend on our subjective feelings.
Jay,
As I was pondering some of the message that I posted last night, how the physical churches in this World attempt to verify their identity with the Church spoken of in the NT, as being the the very true Church that Christ established, and the World can easily identify that the church or their members do live up to the concept that even the worldly individuals would perceive The Savior or his followers to be.
I thought that God’s kingdom was probably better represented to the World while Solomon was reigning as kIng. The World could easily tell that this kingdom was blessed far above any earthly kingdom. Christianity today as the World sees it would not even be in the picture in comparison to Solomon’s. So what is wrong with this picture? As I read and study the letters to the churches including those in Revelation, there is very little reflection of a positive nature, most of the communications deal with problems which should not be in the body of Christians there.
I believe that the lesson that you presented today heads in a direction that is more comparable to the true Church that Christ established. I have always been concerned that many I communicate with seem to ignore what Christ said about his Church (Kingdom which would soon arrive, which would contain his servants).
(Luke 17:20 NIV) Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation,
(Luke 17:21 NIV) nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is within you.”
(John 8:22 NIV) This made the Jews ask, “Will he kill himself? Is that why he says, ‘Where I go, you cannot come’?”
(John 8:23 NIV) But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.
(John 18:36 NIV) Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place.”
To me the NIV does not portray this verse with the same context as the following.
(John 18:36 KJV) Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
(John 18:36 NRSV) Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not from this world. If my kingdom were from this world, my followers would be fighting to keep me from being handed over to the Jews. But as it is, my kingdom is not from here.”
Its this Kingdom which is not of this world that was shown visibly to the followers at Pentecost that we are added to which is also called the (ekklesia) translated Church it became what is seen by the all of Christ’s followers after that date, many followers could see the Church as it is in the state which is not of this World. Many of those followers gave their lives for that invisible to the World Church.
There will be many members of a body called church on this earth that may have never been added to the Church as spoken of in Acts 2:47. By another concept there may be many who were added to that Church who are attending an organization on earth called church who have not grown to the knowledge to identify that the body they are a part of is not a good representation of Christ’s Church. This mixture is what I believe that Jesus was addressing in Matt 13:25-40.
Therefore, as we live our lives in such a manner to display our beliefs in Christ to others we associate with and when we you might say have seen errors within the earthly organizations called church which we can not support their light because it does not convey the light that we believe shines like Christ, we will not be condemned for not attending those organizations. We should always be searching to associate with those who shine like Christ.
Jesus wasn’t speaking about the church. The church is not the kingdom, the church is believers who congregate together to learn and encourage each other until He returns. When Christ returns He will establish the kingdom of God to reign on the earth completely. Jesus was speaking about the kingdom of God (heaven), that is in the heart of every believer, that will finally come to the earth at His Second Coming. The kingdom of God will then be completely established with Christ ruling the whole earth.
Luke 17:24 For as the lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one end to the other, so it will be on the day when the Son of Man comes.
John 8:21-24 Jesus also told them, I am going away, and you will look for Me. But you cannot go where I am going, and you will die with your sins unforgiven. The Jewish leaders asked, Does He intend to kill Himself? Is that what He means by saying we cannot go where He is going? Jesus answered, You are from below, but I am from above. You belong to this world, but I don’t. That is why I said you will die with your sins unforgiven. If you don’t have faith in Me for who I am, you will die, and your sins will not be forgiven.
(Dan 2:40-45 NET) 40 “Then there will be a fourth kingdom, one strong like iron. Just like iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything, and as iron breaks in pieces all of these metals, so it will break in pieces and crush the others. 41 In that you were seeing feet and toes partly of wet clay and partly of iron, so this will be a divided kingdom. Some of the strength of iron will be in it, for you saw iron mixed with wet clay. 42 In that the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, the latter stages of this kingdom will be partly strong and partly fragile. 43 And in that you saw iron mixed with wet clay, so people will be mixed with one another without adhering to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay. 44 In the days of those kings the God of heaven will raise up an everlasting kingdom that will not be destroyed and a kingdom that will not be left to another people. It will break in pieces and bring about the demise of all these kingdoms. But it will stand forever. 45 You saw that a stone was cut from a mountain, but not by human hands; it smashed the iron, bronze, clay, silver, and gold into pieces. The great God has made known to the king what will occur in the future. The dream is certain, and its interpretation is reliable.”
Grace,
When does the final kingdom appear in human history — according to Daniel?
RJ,
I agree that our salvation does not depend on our subjective feelings — in the hyper-Calvinistic sense that my faith is not good enough unless I can relate a spiritual experience of being saved. To most Calvinists, faith is itself sufficient evidence of being among the elect. The extreme version of Calvinism the RM confronted 200 years ago has been largely forgotten by contemporary Calvinism.
I often disagree with John Piper on the interpretation of Romans, but I think he gets Rom 8:16 right —
http://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/am-i-saved
Thanks for this post. I think the old enlightenment approach you describe simply doesn’t work with postmodern people. I remember my own experience as a teenager, reading books like Evidence That Demands a Verdict and The Case for Christ and not being convinced. It was the power of Christ in my life that convinced me that the gospel is a reality. It wasn’t a warm and fuzzy feeling – in fact, there was a lot of pain on the road that led me to real faith. But in spite of the doubts that I still sometimes wrestle with, I am now a convinced and committed Christian.
Brian,
Thanks for the note. I would add that it’s not just a matter of appealing to the Postmodern mind. I think in this case, that the Postmodern mind is asking better questions that we used to ask. Rather than asking, “Do you have proofs that God made the universe?” they ask “Does God live here?” “Does Jesus inhabit your congregation and your lives?” And those are far better questions for any age and any worldview. They are deeply biblical.
Definitely – I can only speak from my perspective as a so-called postmodern millennial, but I always wondered just how convincing the old style of apologetics were. Even if they got people convinced on an intellectual level, did the old arguments change hearts?
Daniel 2:40 Then there will be a fourth nation, as strong as iron. Iron crushes and breaks all things. So, like iron breaks things to pieces, this nation will crush and break all the others.
Daniel 7:23-25 Thus he said: As for the fourth beast, there shall be a fourth kingdom on earth, which shall be different from all the kingdoms, and it shall devour the whole earth, and trample it down, and break it to pieces. As for the ten horns, out of this kingdom ten kings shall arise, and another shall arise after them; he shall be different from the former ones, and shall put down three kings. He shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and shall think to change the times and the law; and they shall be given into his hand for a time, times, and half a time.
The fourth kingdom is a terrifying and frightening and very powerful beast, it is unlike any of the other kingdoms. The fourth kingdom will rule over all the nations. This terrifying kingdom that is to totally occupy and control the entire earth and all nations has not happened, yet.
This references the end times, the 3½ year duration of the Great Tribulation (time, times and half a time) during which the beast will gain control of the entire world, taking over from the 10 kings. Revelation 13:7-8 tells us he will occupy and control every nation on the earth, he’ll make war against Tribulation believers persecuting them while all other people will reject Christ and worship this beast during this time. Revelation 17:12-13 says the ten kings who have power with the beast will give all their power to him during the time of the Great Tribulation. The anti-Christ will be different from the other kings in that he will be indwelt by Satan himself.
Revelation 13:7-8 It was allowed to make war on God’s holy people and to defeat them; and it was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. Everyone living on earth will worship it except those whose names are written in the Book of Life belonging to the Lamb slaughtered before the world was founded.
Revelation 17:12-13 The ten horns of the beast are ten kings who have not yet risen to power. They will be appointed to their kingdoms for one brief moment to reign with the beast. They will all agree to give him their power and authority.
The Lord will then bring His final judgment upon the earth. Christ will come and make war with the beast. And every last vestige of the Gentile kingdoms ruled by the beast will be destroyed, and the Lord Himself will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed.
Daniel 7:21-22 I saw that horn making war against the holy people and defeating them. It did this until the Ancient One, who has lived for endless years, came and judged in favor of the holy people of the Most High. The time came when the holy people took possession of the kingdom.
Revelation 17:14 They will make war against the Lamb, but the Lamb will defeat them, because he is Lord of lords and King of kings. He will defeat them with his called, chosen, and faithful followers.
Jesus will return and He will destroy the kingdoms of this earth bringing them to an end and He will restore the earth with His heavenly kingdom. The final kingdom of the Messianic world rule has not been established, yet. The final kingdom will be established during Christ’s Second Coming.
We have a tendency to equate Christ with His word, but they are not the same as His words did not sacrifice themselves for us. The message of Christ is Christ and His life and death and life and our life should be a reflection of Christ.
Grace you seem to favor prophecy over exact quotes of Jesus in regards to the kingdom in which Jesus says that the kingdom existed during His time and was made up of the saved. (Luke 17:21 NIV) nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the Kingdom of God IS within you.” (John 8:22 NIV) This made the Jews ask, “Will he kill himself? Is that why he says, ‘Where I go, you cannot come’?” (John 18:36 NIV) Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But NOW my kingdom is from another place.”
Ray,
Jesus said, “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever …” The apostles are dead. The church is still around. The kingdom will last forever.
I would make no sense for Jesus to promise the Spirit “forever” to 12 mere mortals. In fact, there is good evidence that events of John 13 – 17 were not part of the Last Supper (no Passover meal, no inauguration of the Lord’s Supper) but a separate gathering that included more than the 12. There is no mention of the “apostles.” No mention of the Twelve. Ben Witherington makes a convincing case that Lazarus was the beloved disciple and present.
Hence, the various references in John 13 – 17 to the “disciples” likely means “disciples” and not “apostles.” And if that’s the case, much of what Jesus said to the church (as it then existed), not merely to a select group of leaders.
Was the command to love as I have loved you just to the apostles? The command to be united?
Are only the apostles attached to the Vine as branches? Is the command to bear fruit only to the apostles?
In short, I wouldn’t be so certain that this particular passage was to the apostles and them only. The Greek in John 14:16 is very much the same as the Septuagint in —
(Gen 6:3 ESV) Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.”
Jesus is declaring that his Spirit would never give up, contrary to the Spirit at the time of Noah that would only last 120 years. In both cases, “forever” is εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα. This is the last age because the Spirit will continue to the end of the age. (The Greek is literally “into the age”, idiomatic for “forever” — that is, to the end of the age.)
The more I study it, the more I’m confident that Jesus was speaking to the disciples as representing the eternal church. Compare —
(Act 2:38-39 ESV) 38 And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”
Notice the parallel — Peter makes a point that the promise is not a one-time thing. It will continue!
Again, notice Jesus’ use of “dwell” in John 14:17. It’s same Greek word translated “abides” in —
(1Jo 2:27 ESV) But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie– just as it has taught you, abide in him.
— which is speaking of us ordinary, non-apostolic Christians. Why would John paraphrase John 14:17 in a letter to ordinary Christians?
So it’s not like I’ve not studied the question. I don’t just throw these things out there and hope no one catches me. There are very serious, real reasons to take John 14:16 as speaking to us Tom, Dick and Harriet Christians.
Traditional apologetics simply convince the converted, or those who don’t have sophisticated reasoning. But we come from a historical tradition that accords the highest value to the Bible, reason, and rightness. This is a combination simply deadly to the idea of a subjective spiritual experience. If we can’t prove we are right about it -and of necessity, that someone else is wrong about it– we have no confidence of this knowledge ourselves. We did not come to it by reason, but in spite of it, which frightens us. And ultimately, we expended so much ammo over the years damning and mocking the charismatics and Pentecostals for their spiritual experiences, we can hardly go back now and join them in their subjective testimony. We’d almost rather go to hell.
“Jesus will come back of course to claim his own and judge all.”
Where does Jesus come to when He comes back to claim His own and judge all?
In these passages of Isaiah, where at and when do these wonderful things happen?
Isaiah 2:4 The Lord will mediate between nations and will settle international disputes. They will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will no longer fight against nation, nor train for war anymore.
Isaiah 11:6-9 In that day the wolf and the lamb will live together; the leopard will lie down with the baby goat. The calf and the yearling will be safe with the lion, and a little child will lead them all. The cow will graze near the bear. The cub and the calf will lie down together. The lion will eat hay like a cow. The baby will play safely near the hole of a cobra. Yes, a little child will put its hand in a nest of deadly snakes without harm. Nothing will hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain, for as the waters fill the sea, so the earth will be filled with people who know the Lord.
Isaiah 65:20-22 No more will babies live only a few days, or the old fail to live out their days. The one who dies at a hundred will be like a young person, and the one falling short of a hundred will seem cursed. They will build houses and live in them; they will plant vineyards and eat their fruit. They won’t build for others to live in, nor plant for others to eat. Like the days of a tree will be the days of my people; my chosen will make full use of their handiwork. They won’t labor in vain, nor bear children to a world of horrors, because they will be people blessed by the LORD, they along with their descendants. Before they call, I will answer; while they are still speaking, I will hear. Wolf and lamb will graze together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox, but the snake its food will be dust. They won’t hurt or destroy at any place on my holy mountain, says the LORD.
That’s Isaiah 65:20-25 in my comment. Really would like to know what your thoughts are about these things.
Grace,
Are you up to a real challenge? Could you read thoughts from others without judging their thoughts by the knowledge you have obtained previously? What I am trying to express could you read a book about Revelation through to its end prior to judging the author as disillusioned? I have read many authors concepts about Revelation, and I can see where you are drawing your concepts from, I also see many scriptures that are conveying a different message than you are projecting. Therefore, I am asking you if you thought that your commitment in what you believe is powerful enough that you could read another concept with an open mind so that not only you could see the other side of the story, but be possibly able to reinforce your own beliefs? I have said all that to attempt to not offend you in suggesting to read a book which I have read, the title could be offensive to some people, I don’t believe that you are one of them.
The book is, The complete idiot’s guide to The Book of Revelation. I would really like to know your thoughts after reading the book.
P.S. there may be others reading this blog that might want to read it also.
Grace,
Your message to me was, “Larry, You seen to assume I haven’t read that book, and you seem to assume that anyone who reads it agrees with the authors opinion on what he thinks others must believe about this topic as if he knows what every other individual believes.” And you are correct I have assumed, but that assumption was based totally upon your testimony. You never admitted either reading or not reading that book. But, your communication about what you think that book is about has assured me that you have not, you declare that the author projects a specific belief as the only true view. The author examines many views and points out some of the problems encountered within that view. I do not remember the author attempting to convince anyone that he has a view that all should believe. Therefore, I again challenge you to read it.
You’re so sure huh? Well, you’re wrong I have read it. I never said the author wanted to convince anyone that he has a view that all should believe. I said: “you seem to assume that anyone who reads it agrees with the authors opinion (pay attention here: on what he thinks others must believe about this topic as if he knows what every other individual believes. I mean he can say so and so believes this or that thus they believe such and such also, when that obviously isn’t always how it goes.)”