Discussing Reading Assignment (Class 01)

I decided to come and teach from over here because I want to read something on my computer. And since I also use my computer for live streaming, I can't be up there. Everybody can hear me, right? Yeah.

We're going to go a little over time tonight. If you have to leave, just know that I will be very disappointed in you. Don't leave. No, I understand if you have to go. But here is something I wanted to share with you.

The Debate Invitation and the Two Questions

A few months ago, I received an email from a friend. He said, hey, read this article. Read this from Craigslist. Remember this? It says, looking for a knowledgeable Christian and atheist who can debate.

Now, my friend sends this to me. My friend is also a pastor. He says, look, you are the Highlander. You're the chosen one. You need to be the one to do this. No, he sent it to me. And he's like, this is all you.

This is what it says. It says, I'm hosting a debate. I'm looking for a knowledgeable Christian and atheist to discuss their beliefs. If you think you'd be interested, please contact me. And it gives the information.

So I contacted the person. I emailed them, told them I was a pastor, that I had seminary training. I've been in multiple public debates, and that I would be willing to consider this. But I had some questions.

One, what's your motivation? Two, what's this about? Why are you doing this? I wanted to know. And he said, well, I'm going to send you some questions to answer. And I said, and he didn't answer my questions.

But he sent me his questions. These are the two questions that he sent me. Number one, he said, why do you believe that there is a God with no proof? Number two, if God is real, why don't he end suffering?

I'm assuming English is not his native language. Either that, or he just has a poor grasp of the English language, which is possible. And he said, if God is real, why don't he end suffering? So I wrote an answer back to both of these.

Presuppositionalism and the Burden of Proof

And I want you to listen for my considering what we've already talked about with presuppositionalism, how I answered the two questions. Number one, the question was, why do you believe that there is a God with no proof?

My answer, when you say there is no proof for God, you are assuming your premise beforehand, which is yet unproven, committing the fallacy of begging the question. For me to prove God exists, you would first have to be willing to admit proof could exist, which, in your question, you have already denied and therefore already determined.

I cannot provide any sufficient proof. I would therefore answer your question with my own. What evidence would be necessary for you to conclude that your premise is wrong? That's all I did. I said, you have already presumed your answer in your question.

All I did was identify his presupposition. The second question, if God is real, why don't he end suffering? My answer, please define evil without an objective standard. I'll wait. That was my answer. Please define evil without an objective standard.

Objective Evil, Hitler, and the Problem of Moral Standards

One of the questions Greg Bonson asked Gordon Stein in the debate was, if there is no objective standard for evil, why was what Hitler did wrong? And you know Gordon Stein could not give him an answer.

He said, well, Hitler was wrong because the morals of society had declared that murder is wrong. And Bonson said, yes, but let's say they didn't. Let's say society said it was OK to murder 6 million Jews.

Would it then be OK? Well, mores and morals are based on more than just the one society. It's based on all of history. He says, but yeah, but what if? See, there is no standard. And if you have no standard, you really don't have any basis upon which to say anything is evil or righteous.

There is no virtue or vice. It just is. It's like Lawrence Krauss, the great atheist philosopher, said, we are all stardust. And if Lawrence Krauss is right, then there is no reason why anything is wrong.

If there is no God, all things are permissible. So that's just something I wanted to share with you. It came to my mind while we were on the break. Let's open our books together and finish the class by reading from the introduction of our book.

A Biblical Perspective on Apologetics

Page 35, I think, is where we said. Roman numeral, a biblical perspective on apologetics. There's no number, just it's under introduction. A biblical perspective on apologetics. Like any other discipline, apologetics lacks a uniform definition.

The standard that's largely been adopted is the defense of the faith, but overlapping definitions abound. Apologetics has been defined as that branch of Christian theology which seeks to provide a rational justification for the truth claims of the Christian faith.

Developing one's authentic self so as to present one's faith as helpfully as possible to one's neighbor. The demonstration that Christianity is reasonable and thus to assure Christians that their faith is not idiotic and to clear away the obstacles and objections that keep nonbelievers from considering the arguments and evidence for the truth of Christianity.

The discipline that deals with a rational defense of the Christian faith. And the task of defending and commending the truthfulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ in a Christ-like, context-sensitive, and audience-specific manner.

And finally, the business of engaging the worldviews of the day intelligently and thus bearing witness to Christ with credibility. Those are all quotes of different ways to define apologetics. Of course, each of these definitions of apologetics is helpful.

As Frame reminds us, a word can have more than one useful definition. And Frame himself presents two complementary definitions. In DKG, which is the Doctrine of the Knowledge of God, he argued that apologetics is little more than the application of scripture to unbelief.

I like that definition. Applying the Bible to unbelief. And on the first page of the first edition of AGG, which I forget what that stands for, he defines apologetics as the discipline that teaches Christians how to give a reason for their hope.

These definitions are simultaneously simple and profound. Their simplicity provides an umbrella to cover all branches of Christian apologetics. Let's elaborate on this profundity. Apologetics is giving a reason for our hope.

This definition jumps right off the page from the charter verse of Christian Apologetics, 1 Peter 3 .15. Apologetics is simply obedience to the command of Peter, no more, no less. When we define apologetics in terms of obedience, scripture maintains its unique status as the final court of apologetic appeal.

But apologetics is also application of scripture to unbelief. Hear this part. This is underlined in my book, and maybe it should be in yours as well. The unregenerate heart desires a God that it can handle with a revelation that it finds palatable.

The Christian defender is not free to water down the faith to suit the taste of rebels. I just love that. We are not free to water down the faith to suit the taste of rebels. The unbeliever may be without excuse with regard to God's existence and moral requirements, but the apologist is likewise without excuse with regard to truth that he or she must uphold and defend.

God has revealed himself and requires his people to serve as kingdom heralds. A proper grasp of scripture, its teachings, and their interconnections is paramount to its robust and God-glorifying application to unbelief.

Finally, apologetics is also application of scripture to unbelief. Unbelief is no respecter of persons. Both Christians and non-Christians wrestle with doubt and suspicion. Hear that again. I underline that too.

Both Christians and non-Christians wrestle with doubt and suspicion. A biblical apologetic targets unbelief wherever it may be found, strengthening the faith of Christians and calling unbelievers to repentance and faith in Christ.

Faith, Unbelief, and the Cry for Help

One of my favorite stories in the gospels is when the man brought his sick child to Jesus and he said, Jesus, heal my son. And Jesus says, if you believed, he will be healed. And the man said, I believe, help my unbelief.

Now, if there was ever a guy in scripture who was absolutely honest, it was that guy. I believe, help my unbelief. This class, I hope, will not only help you become better at defending your faith with others, but it will help you assure that the faith you have in Christ is true in your own heart.

And it will help you with your unbelief. We all wrestle with doubt. And apologetics helps us to understand the justification of our belief. Let's pray. Father, I thank you for your word. I thank you for the truth.

I pray, Lord, that this class will be centered on the truth of your word. And Lord, as we look in the weeks ahead, how we apply what we've talked about tonight, pray that you would be glorified in all that we say and do.

In Jesus' name, amen.