Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | 1 Peter 3:15 but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence; |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | 1 Peter 3:15 But in your hearts set Christ apart [as holy--acknowledging Him, giving Him first place in your lives] as Lord. Always be ready to give a [logical] defense to anyone who asks you to account for the hope and confident assurance [elicited by faith] that is within you, yet [do it] with gentleness and respect. [Is 8:12, 13] |
Bible Question:
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? 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, it will be plain to you that there is more to it than is evident on the surface.) 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 both 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 using intellectual arguments and rational persuasion on the one hand and using Scripture only while passively relying on God on the other hand are two mutually exclusive options. 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? How would you answer this question? Tell us why you answer as you do. Whatever your reasoning behind your answer, tell us what it is. |
Bible Answer: Kalos As you well know scripture can be manipulated to say anything or justify anything, however correct exegesis requires scripture to be taken within context. After that is correctly done, then the question becomes what does that all mean to me, how can I apply it to my life? The answer to this question should be concise and be based upon the intent of the scripture, however it is no longer scripture but rather a meaningful answer to the question how does this scripture apply to me or how can I apply it to my life. I don’t think anyone will disagree with that because that is basically Bible preaching. Apologetics is no different, a concise meaning of the scripture can sometimes used to reveal the truth in opposition to a misinterpretation of those of scripture. While no direct quote of scripture may be used, what is said or referenced should always be in agreement with the scriptures. Many oppose outside references or anything written by mere man as being uninspired. However I find this usually to be the case where a person has applied a completely non orthodox meaning to scripture and is resisting anything that reveals their error. I have heard many rant and rave over creeds, yet I can never find a true believer that can fault the Apostles Creed. People criticize apologetics and many of today’s apologist as being un-Christ-like by pointing out error. Jesus very clearly pointed out error, in fact the Pharisees were unhappy with him for pointing out their error, like many today do with apologists. We are given a spirit of discernment for a reason to guard us from deception. It is one of the gifts of the Spirit and we are told the gifts are to be used to the benefit of all in the body of Christ. If someone has the gift of discernment and the spirit shows him a teaching is in error is it better for him to keep silent or reveal what the spirit has shown him. Would that not be like the eyes seeing a danger and not signaling the rest of the body of that danger? There are some things so minor that precise understanding of them may be hard to discover from the Bible and we can hold different opinions. However these should not divide us. The problem comes when we try to put a different definition on essential truths. That is when a apologetics become important. When a teaching is distorting an basic truth of Christianity then someone or some group has to answer the call to respond with the truth. If not then we would be guilty of letting the darkness put out our light. When a teaching distorts orthodox definitions of God, Christ, Salvation, Grace, etc. to stand by and allow that to happen would be the sin. EdB |