OK, so I tend to stay in the "shallow waters" of Apologetics.
To me, it's absolutely clear that we need to "give an answer of the hope that lies within in us", and I regularly teach basic apologetics in my Church.
What I have seen many times, however, is that there seem to be two speheres of practice in the Christian faith -- the walk and the talk.
I've often expressed it as "when all is said and done, there is usually more said than done".
And I'll be clear -- this thread is obviously in response to Nick's "Journey". I wish him well, and I hope he responds here and interacts, because I'd really like to flesh this out, and another of my favorite sayings is "how can I know what I think til I hear myself say it". (or, in this case, type it) And it's by no means a condemnation of Nick - I think he's a great guy and sincere and really smart, but it appears to be yet another "OK, maybe I wasn't exactly right".
I have known, in my short half century of ministry on this planet, quite a number of apologists who, at one time, espouse a very specific view of eschatology, for example, only to come to a point where they have an "ah hah" moment, or maybe more of a drift, or change, or whatever, and come to a totally different conclusion.
When somebody becomes a preterest when they used to be a premillenialist, or general dispensationalist or whatever, their former podcasts, books, lectures, papers, youtube videos and teachings don't just disappear or get automatically updated.
To me, this looks like an uncertain trumpet. If I strongly believed and taught X, but now I strongly and firmly believe and teach Y, how do I know I'm right "now", or will continue the journey to Z.
I sometimes get chided by my apologist friends for not being stronger on apologetics, but I think I've figured out that there are people a lot smarter and more educated than me who believe X, and another whole set of people a lot smarter and more educated than me who believe Y, where X and Y conflict, but both proponents are good Christian people, just with different understandings.
It's complicated, though, when the X followers become Y subscribers, and so on.
And, at the risk of being accused of judgmentalism, I always wonder about this board's founder who seems to have been on a journey that has led all over the place, and ended up (as I understand it) in not such a good place now. It seems to make so much more sense to me to stay with the things that are clear in scripture, like the instructions we have to love one another, tell the lost about Jesus, encourage, teach, minister, feed the hungry, clothe the poor.
We seem to have this need to "know more" and to be masters of that knowledge, and to be teachers of that knowledge and "lead the way"... but I have seen so many such leaders have to "circle back" and and say, "OK, maybe that wasn't the way, so let's try THIS...."
At what point can we say, in regards to apologetics, "THIS is true and faithful" and "THIS is my personal opinion....". Even Paul seems to have done that.
I believe I had an excellent role model in my Pastor (in whose boots I still often preach) who was very good at "this we know" and "this is my opinion, and here's why...."
One of my Assocaite Pastors is a PhD who is very hard-coded dispensationalist. If that were all he was, he wouldn't be my Associate Pastor, but he's an excellent counselor, preacher, teacher.... Sometimes I wish I could get him to tone down the very specific dispensationalism, but this is my friend who is literally dying, in hospice care (my own daughter is his nurse) and he has said a number of times that he "wishes to die with his boots on", so to speak.
All this to say --- I really think we need to find a "middle ground". Churches should absolutely teach apologetics, but apologetics should not steer the Church.
Finally, I'll close with my Dr J.I. Packer story.
And he picked up his fork and continued eating his green beans. I sat there thnking WOW... DR Packer just said - in a most elegant way and in a British accent - "I don't know".
It was, of course, at that moment that I realized I can say "I don't know". I don't have to have an answer for everything, I don't have to konw everything --- I can stick with what I DO know while I seek to learn more.
So, where's the balance? How do we do apologetics without getting so bogged down that we eventually have to change course, while not really being "the doers" that we are told to be? Do we really need to spend so much time trying to figure out "eschatology" when there are so many other Kingdom things that need to be done?
Just throwing it out there.
To me, it's absolutely clear that we need to "give an answer of the hope that lies within in us", and I regularly teach basic apologetics in my Church.
What I have seen many times, however, is that there seem to be two speheres of practice in the Christian faith -- the walk and the talk.
I've often expressed it as "when all is said and done, there is usually more said than done".
And I'll be clear -- this thread is obviously in response to Nick's "Journey". I wish him well, and I hope he responds here and interacts, because I'd really like to flesh this out, and another of my favorite sayings is "how can I know what I think til I hear myself say it". (or, in this case, type it) And it's by no means a condemnation of Nick - I think he's a great guy and sincere and really smart, but it appears to be yet another "OK, maybe I wasn't exactly right".
I have known, in my short half century of ministry on this planet, quite a number of apologists who, at one time, espouse a very specific view of eschatology, for example, only to come to a point where they have an "ah hah" moment, or maybe more of a drift, or change, or whatever, and come to a totally different conclusion.
When somebody becomes a preterest when they used to be a premillenialist, or general dispensationalist or whatever, their former podcasts, books, lectures, papers, youtube videos and teachings don't just disappear or get automatically updated.
To me, this looks like an uncertain trumpet. If I strongly believed and taught X, but now I strongly and firmly believe and teach Y, how do I know I'm right "now", or will continue the journey to Z.
I sometimes get chided by my apologist friends for not being stronger on apologetics, but I think I've figured out that there are people a lot smarter and more educated than me who believe X, and another whole set of people a lot smarter and more educated than me who believe Y, where X and Y conflict, but both proponents are good Christian people, just with different understandings.
It's complicated, though, when the X followers become Y subscribers, and so on.
And, at the risk of being accused of judgmentalism, I always wonder about this board's founder who seems to have been on a journey that has led all over the place, and ended up (as I understand it) in not such a good place now. It seems to make so much more sense to me to stay with the things that are clear in scripture, like the instructions we have to love one another, tell the lost about Jesus, encourage, teach, minister, feed the hungry, clothe the poor.
We seem to have this need to "know more" and to be masters of that knowledge, and to be teachers of that knowledge and "lead the way"... but I have seen so many such leaders have to "circle back" and and say, "OK, maybe that wasn't the way, so let's try THIS...."
At what point can we say, in regards to apologetics, "THIS is true and faithful" and "THIS is my personal opinion....". Even Paul seems to have done that.
I believe I had an excellent role model in my Pastor (in whose boots I still often preach) who was very good at "this we know" and "this is my opinion, and here's why...."
One of my Assocaite Pastors is a PhD who is very hard-coded dispensationalist. If that were all he was, he wouldn't be my Associate Pastor, but he's an excellent counselor, preacher, teacher.... Sometimes I wish I could get him to tone down the very specific dispensationalism, but this is my friend who is literally dying, in hospice care (my own daughter is his nurse) and he has said a number of times that he "wishes to die with his boots on", so to speak.
All this to say --- I really think we need to find a "middle ground". Churches should absolutely teach apologetics, but apologetics should not steer the Church.
Finally, I'll close with my Dr J.I. Packer story.
We used to have "Super Summer" at Baylor University in Waco, and young people would come from all over the state to spend TWO WEEKS of intensive training, along with sports and concerts and a great time in the Lord. We'd have Youth Speakers from all over the country (and the world), but we'd also have some "big name" speakers for the Adult sessions.
One year, such a speaker was J.I. Packer, and I was assigned to be his "handler". I was to make sure he got from his hotel to his speaking venue, accompany him to meals, get him home at night, and generally see to his needs. Kinda like being his butler or something. It was quite the honor and I got tremendous blessings from being around this giant of a theologian.
One day we were sittting in the Cafeteria having lunch, and a couple of (obviously) seminary students came over and apologized for interrupting, but they had a question for Dr Packer. He graciously accepted the invitation to hear their question, which was long and drawn out and something to do with eschatology but so deep I got lost in the quiestion.
When they finally stopped talking, Dr Packer had just lifted a fork of green beans to his mouth, but stopped, and laid the fork of green beans back on his plate, and folded his hands. The GREAT DR PACKER was about to say something amazingly profound, no doubt.
He said, after a thoughtful pause, "young men... there are some things God does, that we don't know why He does them.... we just know that He does them".
One year, such a speaker was J.I. Packer, and I was assigned to be his "handler". I was to make sure he got from his hotel to his speaking venue, accompany him to meals, get him home at night, and generally see to his needs. Kinda like being his butler or something. It was quite the honor and I got tremendous blessings from being around this giant of a theologian.
One day we were sittting in the Cafeteria having lunch, and a couple of (obviously) seminary students came over and apologized for interrupting, but they had a question for Dr Packer. He graciously accepted the invitation to hear their question, which was long and drawn out and something to do with eschatology but so deep I got lost in the quiestion.
When they finally stopped talking, Dr Packer had just lifted a fork of green beans to his mouth, but stopped, and laid the fork of green beans back on his plate, and folded his hands. The GREAT DR PACKER was about to say something amazingly profound, no doubt.
He said, after a thoughtful pause, "young men... there are some things God does, that we don't know why He does them.... we just know that He does them".
And he picked up his fork and continued eating his green beans. I sat there thnking WOW... DR Packer just said - in a most elegant way and in a British accent - "I don't know".
It was, of course, at that moment that I realized I can say "I don't know". I don't have to have an answer for everything, I don't have to konw everything --- I can stick with what I DO know while I seek to learn more.
So, where's the balance? How do we do apologetics without getting so bogged down that we eventually have to change course, while not really being "the doers" that we are told to be? Do we really need to spend so much time trying to figure out "eschatology" when there are so many other Kingdom things that need to be done?
Just throwing it out there.
Comment