Thank you. Though I should first note that I think the apologetic that is truly the best is not the superb preservation of the Bible (for there can be a such thing as a well preserved text that isn't true) but that of the argument for the bodily resurrection of Christ, one would do well to research much about this and make their best case for it, as it is a strong one and always amplifiable in indirect ways (i.e. I've been working on a paper that should appear at The Skeptical Christian that argues for the fulfillment of Christ's prophecies, which would serve as evidence that He has in fact risen and that He reigns on high if my argument is sucessful). A good tactic would also to know whence a claim comes from rather than doing the equivalent of what appears to be pulling a rabbit out of a hat to some. To use the formerly noted work in progress as an example, I could say in a conversation about accusations of prophecy after the fact that all the New Testament was completed before A.D. 70 when Jerusalem fell, but this would do little good without noting the work of John A.T. Robinson titled Redating the New Testament or being ready to employ some of his better arguments for that dating. I think the best thing is to choose a tactic (or rather let the Holy Spirit choose one) rather than spouting random apologetic. Take for example Acts 17:16-34 where while in Athens Paul is approached by Stoic and Epicurean philosophers and is given a chance to speak of The Way. Obviously, this would be an enormous opportunity for Christ, but the question would arise of what he would say at this time. The answer of course is that he begins with them on their own level, noting with the inscription on an altar stating that it was "To the unknown god", he then went on to declare that this God is YHWH and giving a summary of who He is and who He isn't, what He has done, what He is doing, and what He will do. The mention the resurrection of the dead is the last thing mentioned, and though some of the philosophers merely scoff, others go on to here him through later, yeilding Christ fruit.Zane wrote:The Ghost has it, (C.S. Lewis is another such person who was convined by the evidence that Christ lives.) in the end if you're prepared for a confrontation thats great. But even if you tell people that the documents of Jesus's life are the best preserved pieces of paper in all of history, it comes down to whoever you are talking to, to accept your word for it... Read Ghosts sites their're good.
GhostontheNet wrote:My friend, are you familiar with apologetics (the defense of the faith)? If not, I believe you should be, for our standing orders are to "in your hearts regard Christ the Lord as holy, [B]always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you]" (1 Peter 3:15 ESV) The Greek for "defense" provides more of the context of what it is that we are being asked to do,
ἀπολογία
apologia
Thayer Definition:
1) verbal defence, speech in defence
2) a reasoned statement or argument
I will admit there is a vast amount of literature out there attempting to disprove the truth of Christianity, but there is likewise also much out there to provide evidence for its truth and also to rebut the arguments of the first group within your grasp. This is not to say that I devalue the teaching of scripture to unbelievers or that we shouldn't pray for their salvation, merely to note that I don't think it scriptural to hang around getting pwned in debate, making Christianity look like a religion of being in denial, an intellectual cesspool, and that we truly do "follow cleverly devised myths" (2 Peter 1:16 ESV). Though few debates end with conversions, there are those who convert because extended study convinces them of the truth of Christianity, (besides myself as an example, RightIdea of Theology Web who owns the ironically titled site "GodisNowhere" at http://godisnowhere.org which isn't actually atheist but rather Christian and Lee Stroebel come to mind as examples off the top of my head). I strongly suspect you took a beating because you were unprepared for the engagement; please try to be ever ready to give a defense for the reason for the hope within you in the future. My recomendation is that you learn the logical fallacies and point them out if you spot them http://www.tektonics.org/fallacies.html , and begin research of apologetics (if you hadn't already) with Lee Stroebel's books, Glenn Miller's Christian Thinktank http://www.christian-thinktank.org , J.P. Holding's Tektonics Ministries http://www.tektonics.org and my acquantance Kyle's The Skeptical Christian http://www.skepticalchristian.com as a start.
Kai Nobuyuki wrote:Yes I am quite familiar with that and especially that verse. I was going to the book store when I started defending my faith but I we couldn't get there because there was an accident I will look at the books/websites that you have all given me so I can better prepare myself for something like this happening again. ^^
Ah, "she" was an error in typing. Zarn Ishtare has a point on C.S. Lewis, though I don't recommend works I haven't read, I will note that Lewis has quite a reputation in apologetics. I didn't think that you thought that they would be end all per se, but I had once seen a reviewer of The Case for Christ acting like it was the end all in apologetics and that it was a demonstration of the lameness of all Christian arguments (not true on all accounts), I therefore generally use cautionary notes in fear of someone getting such an idea into their heads.Kai Nobuyuki wrote:It was a guy and I didn't want something that is an end-all but just something to prepare me just so I know what to do, to help me out.
Volt wrote:Don't try to convert others, that's my advice. I know you want to, but maybe you're not ready yet...
rei wrote:"Welcome to Corneria!"
"I like swords."
"Welcome to Corneria!"
"I like swords."
"Welcome to Corneria!"
"I like swords."
"Welcome to Corneria!"
"I like swords."
"Welcome to Corneria!"
"I like swords."
A look at Paul's epistles and Acts reveal Timothy is very often with Paul. Although a young person may not be ready to do these things, there are obviously those that are, and the apostle launches no such criticism against his comrade for his youth, but is all for what he is doing.Paul wrote:[19]I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you soon, so that I too may be cheered by news of you. [20]For I have no one like him, who will be genuinely concerned for your welfare. [21]They all seek their own interests, not those of Jesus Christ. [22]But you know Timothy's proven worth, how as a son[Greek: child] with a father he has served with me in the gospel. [23]I hope therefore to send him just as soon as I see how it will go with me, [24]and I trust in the Lord that shortly I myself will come also. (Philippians 2:19-24 ESV)
That is, although persecution will arise, they need not worry about their defenses when their lives are at stake while standing before the pagan rulers. A reply to my scriptural defense of apologetics would be nice (not to mention the experience of myself and others in regards to the usefulness of it, after all, without this your arguments are compromised from the get go), but I will not hold my breath. Take for example the 23rd verse of the previous cite. If I, like some skeptics I've encountered were to combine it with Matthew 24:34 and other passages to argue that Christ was a false prophet (and therefore according to the Law not sent by YHWH) because His second coming did not occur when they allege that it was to occur, how would you reply? This was the main motivation for why I've written an in depth anylasis of the texts these passages belong to, which now that its completed spans 67 pages. I do not say that one should not rely upon the Holy Spirit on such matters but that He doesn't do everything. After all, is it that your religious leaders at your church suddenly recieve complete revelation on how to do their jobs effectively, or do they go to seminary to learn about it?Matthew wrote:[17] Beware of men, for they will deliver you over to courts and flog you in their synagogues, [18] and you will be dragged before governors and kings for my sake, to bear witness before them and the Gentiles. [19] When they deliver you over, do not be anxious how you are to speak or what you are to say, for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour. [20] For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you. [21] Brother will deliver brother over to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death, [22] and you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. [23] When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next, for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes. (Matthew 10:17-23 ESV, compare with Matthew 24, especially verse 34)
I'll try my best. I will also note that I've seen apologists of all denominations, so I doubt it will be a problem.uc pseudonym wrote:I would also like to thank everyone for having a discussion in which people do not necessarily disagree but haven't begun to argue in a vicious way. Provided we avoid denominational matters, CAA is in full support of this, and it is nice to see such a thing work out for once.
Agreed. Also, I like the story.uc pseudonym wrote:As to the actual topic, I believe that a great deal of good has already been said in a number of different senses. Allow me to add one thing: however you work your apologetics, do so humbly.
This brings to mind a (true) story, about a young man in college. He attended a lecture in which a speaker brilliantly defended Christianity. During the question time, however, a student stood up and asked a question that absolutely floored the young man. He thought there was no way that the speaker could answer the question, and it was actually starting to make him wonder about his faith.
To his surprise, the speaker easily fielded the question. He worked through the logic of it, slowly boxed him into a corner and in the end left his question in no more than logical shambles. The young man was greatly encouraged, and left the lecture in a good mood.
But after the debate lies the true point of the story: the young man happened to be walking near the student who had asked the question and was now speaking with another student. What he said was this: "Well, he might be right, but I still hate his d*** guts."
That stuck with the young man (whose name I unfortunately cannot remember), and it stuck with me as well. In terms of Christian debate, the point is not to win, but to help your opponent find the truth.
Volt wrote:it's all good.
I get misunderstood a lot. It's because my mind is like this on the inside...[Galactic madness]
so much going on!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 301 guests