Sproul, R.C. et al Classical Apologetics Academie Books, Zondervan Corp. Grand Rapids, MI 1984
Secular is derived from “the age or the world.” Secularism is an ideology or world view that is not religious and does not believe in God.p4-6 Sub varieties include naturalism, Humanism, Relativism, Positivism, Pragmatism, Pluralism, and existentialism p9. The impact of secularism has been pervasive along with cultural ethics. The Judeo-Christian consensus is no more. The church had strong influence in the founding or universities. The word university had derivation in the blending of unity and diversity. Now it has become a multiversity with no unity. Theology depts. at universities have changed their name to dept. of religion p10-11. P. Tillich argued that a God who could be proved would be no God; He is partly beyond comprehension.p15 We are rational creatures, God gave us minds. God wants us to reason with nonbelievers, Paul did, Acts 17:31; Elijah did on the Mt. 1 Kings 18:21. Is. 41:21-3; Jesus did: Mark 2:10-11; John 5:31-6 Apologetics means defense p20 Intellect first then faith and trust.p21 1Pet. 3:15 Pagan is pre-Christian and builds on mythology and nature. The pagan knows God by natural revelation. P39
Natural Theology and Fideism: R. Catholic council 1 “Reason and Faith do not contradict one another” There must be no reduction of faith to reason and no reduction of reason to faith. Natural revelation or general revelation is given by God. Natural theology is reasoned about God by man. Natural Theology(Aquinas promoted) stands as an opposite to Fideism p.27 Kant criticized the natural theistic proofs The Critique of Pure Reason; He and N. Cusa argued that 1. the senses and reason are bound to finite objects and can’t make the inference to the infinite. Some say religion is made safe by not offering it to critics by reason, and keeping it in the area of faith. The Skepticism of Hume opposed God proofs. 1.Epistemology- knowledge is subjective., 2 Antimonies –opposites K Barth followed up on Kant. Some theologians have rejected proofs and turned to Fideism. Counter: God has given us reason to discern between truth and falsehood. P35 The proper reasoning is to move form general revelation to special.p.36 The Bible makes the claim that that natural revelation is true, therefore it must be true.38
Existentialism also questions whether we can know anything, and is there any purpose.
The Bible confirms Natural Theology: Psalms talk of Gods glory in nature.Ps.19 “The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky proclaims the work of His hands. Day after day they pour out speech; night after night they communicate knowledge.” Rom. 1: 18-20 “For God’s wrath is revealed from heaven against all godlessness and unrighteousness of people who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth, 19 since what can be known about God is evident among them, because God has shown it to them. 20 From the creation of the world His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what He has made. As a result, people are without excuse.” Comments: Ungodliness comes first and the unrighteousness- or idolatry and then immorality.p41 We suppress or repress God’s truth. The R. Catholic Church favored the view that we had to think and reason from nature to get Gods truth. Calvin favored the view that it was near immediately apparent, especially the sense of right and wrong. Calvin “But the greater part of mankind, enslaved by error, walk blindfolded in his glorious theatre.” The blindfold is on the heart not on the eyes.p.48 Rom. 1:21-2 “For though they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God or show gratitude. Instead, their thinking became nonsense, and their senseless minds were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools.” P.62 summary Rom.
Reconstruction of Natural Theology: 3 areas: 1. Creativity needed(challenge the assumptions), 2.problem of disagreement among scholars- 4 types of error can occur: epistemological, formal reasoning, factual errors, psychological bias;(the question of God is not one of neutral consequences),3. common ground. Verification vs. Falsification: It is difficult to verify God’s existence. It is almost impossible to prove that he doesn’t exist. 3 areas of Common ground: 1. The law of noncontradiction; 2. The validity of the law of causality; 3. The basic reliability of the sense of perception. A statement can be formally valid but materially false- the unicorn; But something materially true can’t be formally false. Barth and others say human logic can’t be extended to a transcendent God. Plantinga notes a fallacy here: There thinking begins with a pious concern for God’s greatness and majesty, but results in agnosticism in knowing nothing about God. God does use logic and is the source of it. We can know God partially as he desires a relationship with us. Some Christian paradoxes: The Trinity, the duality of the person of Christ, and the issue of God’s sovereignty vs. our freedom. Mysteries are also possible.80 Causal thinking is important in science and many disciplines. Every effect must have a cause. A cause may bring and event to pass or help or sustain and effect. False causes can be named. There is a difference between a necessary and sufficient condition for and event. p84 Jesus signs and miracles is evidence. Some senses need to confirm findings.
The principal limitation of Empirical induction is that is fails to establish universals. Even Locke acknowledged that some relating, combining and abstracting of ideas is needed. However, our senses can be deceived and error. Nevertheless we must assume that our senses are basically reliable. For a universal to be established inductively requires a comprehensive and exhaustive sampling. A. all men are mortal; B. Socrates is as man, C. Socrates is mortal. How do we establish all men are mortal? However we do not need to have universal knowledge to have certain knowledge to act on. Usually where natural theology is attacked at one of the 3 above common laws. John 1:46 “Come and see.” and 1 John 1:1
The Ontological Argument The thesis of agnosticism is that it impossible for finite beings to know anything about the infinite. Henrich Heppe summarizes the Reformed doctrine of the incomprehensibility of God.p94 The finite cannot perfectly grasp the infinite, but we can grasp some of it. We can’t perfectly define Him, but we can describe Him. We have to know something about infinity to deny it. The finite and infinite are reciprocal concepts. We must know something of both to know something of either or to distinguish between them. In math we know a symbol for infinity. A personal experience with God also involves some knowledge of Him, Anselm p96. Existentialism believes without understanding or reason and is false. P 97 Just because God is not fully comprehensible does not mean that we can’t comprehend anything about Him. Classical theistic proofs vary from presuppositional to probabilistic ones. Being and our being is. That is a basic starting point of philosophy.p100 There are also beings outside of us. To think of being is to know being. We cannot think of the nonexistence of a perfect, necessary being.p102 If it is a perfect being it is one pole of our thought and it can not be nonexistent. Zero and infinity can’t be nonexistent. An actual perfect being would be greater than a hypothetical perfect being and could explain our being and consciousness. N. Malcom has reframed the O. argument: p 105 Since God is the source of perfection and ultimate truth and being in our thought; He could not have come into existence or gone out of existence during the lifetime of man. He necessarily existed for ever. If He does not exist, it would be impossible to conceive of perfect truth, perfection and being. The argument is still somewhat tenuous. P 108
The Cosmological and Teleological Arguments p109 Not everything must have and antecedent cause, but every effect must have one by definition. For some things the cause has not been determined, like random behavior of subatomic particles.p11; but this does not mean there is no cause. The cosmos is an orderly being and the definition from Greek means order. Our minds are orderly. Sproul offers 4 options for the molecule or world: 1. an illusion, 2.self created, 3. self existent, 4. Crated by something self existent. The first 2 are easily refuted and violate the laws of logic. The idea of creation by chance is creation by nothing. When low probability arguments are given for this they actually open the door for it, given enough time. Chance has no being and no power.p118 It is logical that everything was created by a self existent, eternal, transcendent being God. The alternate of creation out of nothing with no cause is hard to believe. When god creates out of nothing there is a cause, but we don’t know how. He is all powerful.p121. He is personal and purposeful because he created personal and purposeful beings.
The Teleological Argument There is certainly evidence of design and purpose or order in the universe. Kant felt the design and purpose was a strong argument.p124. Some may say that some things and people appear to have little purpose at times. Being may show purpose many times, and occasionally do something that shows not purpose. Doe this disprove the purpose argument? Dysteleolgy is a word for lack of purpose. Humans and beings are fallible and do make mistakes, but this does not disprove an overriding purpose, or a God who is purposeful. There are some acts for which we do not know the purpose. There are disasters, evil acts and disease in the world. These may show Gods wrath or be the result of man’s sin and rebellion against God. Pinnock gave 8 arguments for God p 129: 1 Thermo. 2. Rationality 3. Personal Freedom, 4. Morality which we feel deep down, 5. ESP, 6. Hope, 7. Meaning (craving for this), 8 the History of Jesus and resurrection. Chance cannot create purpose. If God never showed displeasure with man or evil or immoral acts he would not be a just and moral God. The computer can do nothing more than it is programmed for by men. GIGO principle
An outline of Presuppositional Apologetics PA p183 Cornelius Van Till wrote Jersulaem and Athens and is a leading advocate of PA. Sproul states this belief undermines the Christian religion.p.184 C. Pinnock, J. Montgomery, and G. Lewis agree. PA has become ultimate Fideism riding under the banner of super rationality. J. Edwards say there must be an eternal cause of the universe, and this being must exist and then we can descend to His many perfections.p185 PA criticizes this as just man’s reasoning, and we should start with God and faith in Him. They also say that without knowing every thing about God We can’t argue for anything about Him.p 186 He enables us to think analogically about him. They claim that PA can only confirm but not prove God. The counter argument is that they are abandoning apologetics in the process, and loosing all arguments of reason.p.188 For reason first decides who we will believe
Apologetic Traditions of Augustine, Luther and Calvin. P.189 Although Augustine used reason and apologetics, he somewhat favored the PA approach. He stressed acceptance of authority as a guide to reason and of submitting to authority. However he did state in Of True Religion “Reason leads to understanding and knowledge, for we have got to consider whom we believe” For reason first decides who we will believe. He also favored miracles as validating the authority of Christ. Evidence is the ground of faith but not the cause of it. Luther was not high on reason either and he disliked philosophy. Calvin stated that God has shown himself clearly in nature. P199 “The signs of divinity are within us as well as without.” “God has sown a seed of religion in all men.” He said this knowledge does not lead us to salvation. Non-believers can become blind to God. Some knowledge often breaks through their blindness. He noted that even philosophers like Plato could see some truths from God. P201 Calvin noted the human body was a ingenious and show design. He supported the cosmological argument. He noted there is a difference between human and divine assurance. The Spirit bears excellent testimony as does the Bible. Miracles can provide both a preparation for and conformation of faith. P206 We can know a little of God as he shows us, but he remains unknown in many respects. Reformed orthodoxy- Princeton theologian, B.B. Warfield was a great apologist. P209 quote “Without general revelation, special revelation would lack some basis.” Catholic Orthodoxy, Pope Leo (1895) p.210 “ Even if faith is above reason, nevertheless, no true dissention or disagreement can be found between them”.
The Primacy of the Intellect and Autonomy: p212 We must start with our minds in thinking; there is no other place to start. Van Til says we must start with God. He also says it is a sin to start with our autonomy; we should start submitted to God. It is true that after we know God we should submit to him. If we first don’t know him we must start with ourselves. We cannot start from above when we are below.
The Noetic Influence of Sin Calvin thought that reason in some way confirms scripture.p241 There are some confirming proofs for the mind but the heart may not accept them. The supernatural truths of faith and of the Spirit surpass reason. J. Edwards also favored the use of reason and the authority of the scriptures.p243
The attack on the Theistic Proofs: p.253 by Van Til, Clark, Kant, K. Barth, C. Henry; Refuting by Aquinas, Bishop Butler, J. Montgomery, Buswell, C. Pinnock and S. Hackett. Van Till held that there was no knowledge except by special revelation.
The attack on Christian Evidences:p.276 PA rejects miracles and prophecy as argument for Bible truth. Traditionalists use these arguments and also say due to natural revelation, the possibility of special revelation is likely. If He were going to save us, He would need to reveal the details of how.p280 Will generally start with a philosophy before we read the Bible. Early in life we al learn the laws of identity, noncontradiction, and the excluded middle.p281 The 3 laws are common to reasoning and even to Dogs. Miracles do play a role in belief-Nicodemus and John the Baptist. Van Til would say that eventually natural explanations will be found for miracles. However if causes are found this does not disprove God’s intervention.. For the PA they must assume the Bible is the true word of God.
The Self Attesting God. At the bottom PA is a paradoxical theology. Examples: Election vs. reprobation (giving over to sin) of Calvin: A sovereign God can give or withhold grace, but he does it for a rational reason, justice for sin. If man has no free will, then God is the author of sin and sinful beings. P 289. Man has some logic and senses which tell true observations. Black–white example. I see something as black, but God sees it as white. Am I then not to rely on my senses and call it white? The transcendence and immanence of God gains meaning with creation, as he becomes transcendent over it and imminent in it. Calvin notion of imminence was that His will was the sole efficient one in the universe. This approaches pantheism or deism.p 293 If God is infinite as Calvin and most theologians think, how can his will include the will of finite beings? When finite things are attached to the infinite, it is no longer infinite. This is a logical dilemma.
Supernatural Revelation and Miracles.p.137 2 Stages: Natural revelation then supernatural (special): We often hear it said by Fideism that the Spirit testifies to the word. It is the word that testifies to the Spirit, however. There is also a mutual corroboration. This can’t just be circular reasoning however. Some say the Bible is the word of God, because it says this about 3000 times. However, the reasoning is still weak, because just because a book, any book, say is it the word of God does not make it so. p138 There is other evidence: majesty of style, the heavenliness of its content, its inner coherence and consistency, and its symmetrical pattern of truth. The 3000 times is a plus. Calvin maintained that the word could not really be understood apart form the Spirit and that the Spirit could not be known apart form the word. The Westminster Conf: “our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth, and divine authority thereof (the Bible) is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit, bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts.” Here His witness is to the word not to Himself(the Spirit). Here the Sproul makes and analogy of how Jesus was known as Christ. John 10:38 “Though you do not believe me, believe the works.” Jesus words told who he was but that was not enough. The disciples saw and heard him but were also convinced by the works they saw. The Jews saw and heard him and did not believe (that He was God incarnate), but they did not see as many of the works directly. God or the spirit testified to Peter who Jesus was, as this was a difficult thing for man to grasp.p140 Using Christ as an example, for the Spirit; simply seeing Jesus was not enough, just as feeling the Spirit is not enough to know Him. Evidence and the Word help confirm the Spirit. The following confirmation of the word logically is given: p 141
- The Bible contains reliable history
- The Bible records miracles as part of the history
- The miracles authenticate the Bible’s messengers and their message
- Therefore the Bible message ought to be received as divine.
- The Bible message includes the doctrine of its own inspiration.
- Therefore the Bible is more that a generally reliable record; It is a divinely inspired record.
Ref. for Bible history: Martin- The Reliability of the Gospels; Bruce The New Testament Documents, Are They Reliable, and The Defense of the Gospel in the New Testament. P142 Critics: Bultmann, Kasemann. Archeologist W.F. Albright says they (critics) fail to consider the archeological and linguistic evidence that supports the history of the Bible. A miracle is defined here as a visible deed done by God in a manner other than, and contrary to, His usual way of acting, commonly called natural law. P.144 Miracles are visible for both the believer and nonbeliever. As such, a miracle validates the messenger as having God’s favor. God is the one who has all power and can bring what He wishes to pass. Natural theology shows there is a God and if there is a God, miracles are possible. P146 With no God, miracles could be attributed to random chance. Similarly Jesus resurrection validates Him as God’s messenger and his words validate that He was God incarnate: John 10:30 “ I and the Father are one”; John 14:9 “ He who has seen me has seen the Father” The miracles in history show God revealing Himself as recorded in the Bible. Unless one establishes the nonexistence of God, he cannot rationally insist that miracles are. impossible.p150 There are some counterfeit miracles, perhaps occurring more than the true ones. This does not disprove the true ones.
One prerequisite of a prophet is that he confirms what is already known in the Bible as well as reveal the unknown. He also speaks for God. P150 John 3:2 Nicodemus noted Jesus miracles as authenticating him. Also Mark 2:9-11- Take your pallet and walk; John 11:41-42- Lazarus rises. The miracles certify the messenger and the message.p153 Jesus was sinless and errorless, but not omnisciencet.p154 Sproul states that for the most part, only God’s messengers can to miracles. P156 The magicians of Egypt did magic not miracles. Arguments against the immaculate conception of Mary and her spinelessness. 1.All people are sinners. 2. Thomas Aquinas argued against it.p160 Jesus upheld the truth of the scriptures. Wikipedia: Docetism can be further explained as the view that since the human body is temporary and the spirit is eternal, the body of Jesus must have been an illusion and, likewise, his crucifixion. This was a Gnostic belief.
The Spirit, the Word and the Church: The word witnesses to the Spirit and the Spirit to the Word. Matt. 16:16-17 is cited where the Father reveals to Peter who Jesus is. In Jesus baptism the Spirit descends on Him. When Christ is on Earth the spirit play a lesser role; after Pentecost the Spirit play a greater role.(p 163) John 6:63 “the words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.” The disciples had already been baptized in the spirit; but had a large outpouring of it after Pentecost. Christ was the word and spoke of the spirit coming after Him to witness. Christ said the Spirit would “teach you all things, and bring to you remembrance all things I have said to you.” John 14:26 “Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the world of God.” Rom 10:17; Eph 6:17 The word is the sword of the spirit.
Sproul outlines three classes of reasoning about the inerrancy of the scriptures:
- Reason against the scriptures: Example Krisop Lake, Liberal theologian; The doctrine of divine inspiration of the scriptures is untrue. God could do miracles if he wanted. For the most part miracles did not occur. Recent science disproves them.
- The churches view or doctrine is correct about the scriptures: Roman Catholic view. This view has a somewhat liberal view on scriptural inerrancy. The church doctrine is supreme.
- Reason supports the scriptures: This the protestant fundamental churches view. The scriptures are divinely inspired and miracles occurred in the Bible. The scriptures are primary, and church doctrines secondary. Rationale: The Son of God affirms the Bible as the word of God. The spirit testifies to the Word. Rom. 8:16, Heb. 4:12; The word of God itself says that it is the word of God 3000 times(p.178). It also says it is inspired. It would not make sense that it has errors in the original.
.