Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Are Christian apologetics unbiblical? | 1 Pet 3:15 | Radioman2 | 101160 | ||
A Logical Defense But in your hearts set Christ apart as holy [and acknowledge Him] as Lord. Always be ready to give a LOGICAL DEFENSE to anyone who asks you to account for the hope that is in you, but do it courteously and respectfully. [Isa. 8:12, 13.] (AMPLIFIED 1 Peter 3:15 Emphasis added.) If we shouldn't use arguments[footnote 1] to promote the Gospel--because it's leaning on human wisdom and not God--then what are we to say? I have been challenged a number of times recently on the use of intellectual arguments and rational persuasion in the defense of the gospel. In other words, the whole idea of Christian apologetics is called into question as being unbiblical. For example, one reader said: "don't resort to...arguments to evade the clear statements of truth in the Bible,...be guided by Bible truth and put our trust in it first and foremost." (On the surface, this sounds OK. However, if you read this quote in the context of the post in which it is written, you will see there is more to it than meets the eye.) Another wrote: "I want to see Scripture not no (sic) mumbo jumbo from Strong['s] or any other different references. I want Scripture." Another asked: "Is this article inspired by revelation, or, the Spirit of the living God, or, is it man's wisdom?" The implication by these readers seems to be: you must choose between the use of intellectual arguments and rational persuasion or Bible verses alone. It's either/or. The assumption here is that the two are mutually exclusive options. If we shouldn't use arguments[footnote 1] to promote the Gospel--because it's leaning on human wisdom and not God--then what are we to say? How would you answer this question? Please tell us why you answer as you do. Whatever your reasoning behind your answer, tell us what it is. ------------- [Footnote 1] When I use the word "argument" here, I do not mean it in the sense of "quarrel" or "disagreement." I mean it in the following sense: "argument -- 2 a : a reason given in proof or rebuttal b : discourse intended to persuade 3 b : a coherent series of statements leading from a premise to a conclusion" (www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary). --Radioman2 |
||||||
2 | Are Christian apologetics unbiblical? | 1 Pet 3:15 | John Reformed | 101165 | ||
Every time I see your name I wonder if you were in the Navy? :-) I was a Radarman3 myself. But getting back to your question...I do agree with your contention that logical arguements are not unbiblical per se. In fact they can be used effectively to shoe the listener that faith itself is not anti-intellectual. My problem is when faith is placed in the power of arguements themselves. In other words, the mis-use of logic. The idea being "if only I can prove by nature itself that God is, then this person is bound to see the light!" John |
||||||
3 | Are Christian apologetics unbiblical? | 1 Pet 3:15 | Radioman2 | 101166 | ||
John: Good point, John, and I agree with you. I was in the United States Marine Corps. My M.O.S. was Field Radio Operator. (My brother, Sonarman, was in the Navy. He was a sonar technician.) Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
4 | Should one try to be clear or muddled? | 1 Pet 3:15 | Radioman2 | 101171 | ||
Should one try to be clear or muddled? 'There's another problem, and it's a practical one. I'm not supposed to seek to be clever or persuasive or to use arguments to convince, apparently. Then what am I to do? If we shouldn't use arguments to promote the Gospel--because it's leaning on human wisdom and not God--then what are we to say? What do I say then when communicating my faith? If I'm not supposed to seek to be clever or persuasive or to use arguments to convince, then what am I to do? Should I work at being clear when I communicate? Or should I try to be muddled lest I depend on clarity and not the Spirit to make the difference? Should I give reasons for what I believe or only gently make assertions with a smile on my face being careful not to respond to challenges someone might raise lest it sound like I'm trying to argue for the Gospel and not depend on the Holy Spirit?' ____________________ Quoted from the transcript of a commentary from the radio show "Stand to Reason," with Gregory Koukl. |
||||||
5 | Should one try to be clear or muddled? | 1 Pet 3:15 | GeorJoy | 101194 | ||
Oh Lord! anyone who knows anything about the person behind this keyboard, knows that I would love to answer these questions, sword in hand and, face to face with the ("humanist" or "so called Christian" who would rather not offend the world than to witness THE Word,) who asked them! This IS what I meant when I said in my profile that "some bring out the first of the transitive senses of my gift" of Exhortation... Some of my previous posts on this fourm, particularily those pertaining to homosexuality, marriage and even some noted to and in response to justme will set the tone for my answers to such questions. "Exhorter" in Christ George |
||||||
6 | Should one try to be clear or muddled? | 1 Pet 3:15 | John Reformed | 101598 | ||
Hi George! Rom 12:8 or he who exhorts, in his exhortation; he who gives, with liberality; he who leads, with diligence; he who shows mercy, with cheerfulness. John |
||||||