Historically, some portions of the church have struggled to understand the practical relationship between Apologetics and Spirituality. This was especially prevalent in Schaeffer’s time. He regularly encountered those who were critical of the discipline of Apologetics and saw it as merely academic and conceptual, and likewise often saw Spirituality as something with little relationship to the mind. In contrast, on the other hand, perhaps fulfilling the skepticism of the former, there were frequently those that practiced forms of Apologetics that could be construed as more purely academic and intellectual and arguably, out of touch with the everyday situation of the non-believer. Schaeffer felt very strongly that Apologetics needed to be brought into the “rough and tumble” world of the common man
Michael Polanyi – Part III: Away from Objectivity and Towards Personal, Biblical Truth
The challenge to objectivity in casual and academic discourse is quite common by Christians and non-Christians. This invitation is a hermeneutical device to correct fanciful, or even robust, disagreements. But, the philosopher Thomas Nagel, calls this directive “a view from nowhere.” That is, it is a viewpoint that is not only impossible to achieve, but one that cannot fulfill its intended purpose. Michael Polanyi has soundly demonstrated that modern science is not objective and that the claim of objectivity is destructive to the pursuit of science, as well as social and academic freedom. Instead, the pursuit of knowledge and truth is centered in the person and his or her calling. This paper, then, is a beginning view at what apologetics and theology might achieve from such “personal knowledge” that is Biblically grounded. Jesus statement, “I am the way, the truth, and the life,” is one text among others that indicates this direction. A few theologians who have moved in this direction will be explored, along with other suggestions for future study. The accusation of subjectivity is avoided by the objective nature of biblical inerrancy, sound theology, and principles of reason.
Book review of
Michael R. Licona, Why Are There Differences in the Gospels? What We Can Learn From Ancient
Biography, New York: Oxford University Press, 2017. 308 pp. $35.00. (Cloth) ISBN 9780190264260.
Abstract Title: Believer’s Baptism: A Biblical and Theological Defense Abstract: Believer’s Baptism: A Biblical and Theological Defense For the past two millennia, Believer's Baptism has been a crucial aspect of the New Testament church. This divine ordinance represents one of the central tenets of Baptist identity. Jesus Christ commanded His followers to be baptized, so it is incumbent upon Christians to fully understand and adhere to the biblical model set forth in the Word of God. Over the years, the subject of baptism has been fraught with controversy, resulting in sharp disagreements between individuals, churches, and denominations. This paper will examine various ideologies and will seek to define the meaning, method, and mode of baptism that is most closely aligned with Scripture. It will also serve as a defense for Southern Baptist beliefs on baptism as set forth in The Baptist Faith and Message. For the purpose of this research, an exegetical study of Mark 16:16, John 3:5, Acts 2:38 and 22:16, Romans 6:3-4, and 1 Peter 3:21 will be carefully examined. These select verses, coupled with apostolic teachings found within the New Testament, will provide a theological basis for Believer's Baptism. ISCA Membership: Student Conference: 2017 Daniel Howard, Ph.D. student at The Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary
Often mischaracterized and even arbitrarily dismissed as only an art philosophy, Schaeffer teaches us an apologetic of beauty that is missed by many scholars. Once understood, the strength of thought and the power of the clarification of the historic Christian position utterly confounds the very foundations of Atheism. Moreover, for the believer, when realized, it adds tremendous edification to one's soul.
The political environment can be (and often is) a difficult environment in which the believer can provide a Christian apologetic. As the church is the “pillar and support of truth,” it is incumbent upon believers to engage the political sphere. Scripture reveals that God ordains all powers, yet, of course, there are rare times when Christians cannot submit to the state. The purpose of this paper is to portray a biblical apologetic toward governing authorities by considering what Scripture reveals with regard to the church’s behavior toward government officials and how to minister to them. Consideration will be given to those uncommon instances when Christians must practice civil disobedience. The paper will also address the historical development of a Christian doctrine asserting the relationship between the church and state (by considering the notion of “two swords,” and various historical examples). The paper will conclude with the specifics for engaging the political environment with a biblical apologetic.
Francis Schaeffer believed apologetics to be the servant of evangelism and said "pre-evangelism is no soft option." All too often, Christian Apologetics strives to make "a frontal assault on a superior force" (Greg Koukl), when in reality the force is not truly superior in thought, but only superior in numbers. Dr. Schaeffer's non-mechanical approach guides us toward not only a good apologetic, but a means to address the whole person amidst a hostile world.
This is a 59-page paper that begins by reconsidering the question of whether or not and to which degree an uncompromising stance on full biblical inerrancy (as opposed to limited or partial inerrancy) may be important for those involved in pre-evangelism and evangelism. It proceeds to consider the concern raised by some that inerrancy may be a catalyst for apostasy from the faith. Other challenges posed to full-inerrantists by limited-inerrantists that are examined. How helpful are the illustrations of concentric circles for showing which docrines are more important than others? Is the reliance on "outdated" Scottish Realism philosophy by paleo-inerrantists a good reason for the neo-inerrantists to dismiss their conclusions? Is there really no overlap between interpretation and inerrancy? There is a particular focus given to the challenges raised by genre (apocalyptic) studies. The problem of "Jewish zombies" in Matthew 27:51-53 is used as a case study.
As one begins to explore the thought of Francis Schaeffer on the matter of inerrancy, it is easy to see that Dr. Schaeffer dealt with the subject on multiple fronts. Firstly, from his personal life, having come to faith from Agnosticism by deciding to read the Bible for the sake of intellectual honesty. Then also. having met his future wife Edith, at a youth gathering, where the speaker was presenting on the topic of “How I know the Bible is not the Word of God.” From these stories, from his early years, to his ongoing writings, and his involvement with the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI) in the closing years of his life, it is safe to say that Dr Schaeffer dealt with the matter of inerrancy his entire life.
