Apologetic's Crash Course Part 1: Traditional Arguments

Introduction

Apologetics vs. Evangelism

It is quite common to confuse apologetics and evangelism. Put simply, evangelism is proclaiming the good news of the gospel whereas apologetics is defending the truth claims of Christianity.

What is the task and means of apologetics?

1 Peter 3:15 says, “always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect”. Therefore the task of apologetics is not necessarily to share the gospel but to defend it as rational and true. That being said, your apologetics must lead to the gospel in order to be coherent but the sharing of the gospel is in the realm of evangelism not apologetics. The means by which this is conducted is with “gentleness and respect” lest we contradict the content of our message with the delivery of that message.

Traditional Arguments for the Existence of God

Ontological Argument – Proposed by St. Anselm in the 11^th century, rejected by Thomas Aquinas and reformulated by Rene Descartes then refuted by Immanuel Kant.

Syllogism:

·         Premise A: God by his definition is perfect

·         Premise B: Existence is a pre-condition for perfection. If something exists it is more perfect than if it didn’t exist.

·         Conclusion: God exists because God is perfect and existing is more perfect than not existing.

Objections:

·         One objection was that you could talk about a “perfect island” that must exist somewhere as I describe it because existing would make the island more perfect than not existing.

·         The premise mandates the conclusion and it is therefore a tautology.

·         By this logic one could prove that unicorns exist if you simply define the “perfect” unicorn.

Thomas Aquinas’ Arguments – In the 13^th century Thomas Aquinas in his work “Summa Theologica” asserted 5 arguments that he thought to be sufficient proof and ultimately better than the ontological argument.

1)     Argument from Motion - sometimes casually referred to as the “first push” argument.

a.      Our senses prove that some things are in motion.

b.      Things move when potential motion becomes actual motion.

c.       Only an actual motion can convert a potential motion into an actual motion.

d.      Nothing can be at once in both actuality and potentiality in the same respect (i.e., if both actual and potential, it is actual in one respect and potential in another).

e.      Therefore nothing can move itself.

f.        Therefore each thing in motion is moved by something else.

g.      The sequence of motion cannot extend ad infinitum.

h.      Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.

2)     Argument from Efficient Causes – Everything has a cause but there must be a first cause or an uncaused cause that can account for everything that is caused.

a.      We perceive a series of efficient causes of things in the world.

b.      Nothing exists prior to itself.

c.       Therefore nothing is the efficient cause of itself.

d.      If a previous efficient cause does not exist, neither does the thing that results.

e.      Therefore if the first thing in a series does not exist, nothing in the series exists.

f.        The series of efficient causes cannot extend ad infinitum into the past, for then there would be no things existing now.

g.      Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God.

3)     Argument from Possibility and Necessity (Reductio argument) – If there was ever a time when nothing existed then nothing could possibly exist now so there must be an incontingent being.

a.      We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, that come into being and go out of being i.e., contingent beings.

b.      Assume that every being is a contingent being.

c.       For each contingent being, there is a time it does not exist.

d.      Therefore it is impossible for these always to exist.

e.      Therefore there could have been a time when no things existed.

f.        Therefore at that time there would have been nothing to bring the currently existing contingent beings into existence.

g.      Therefore, nothing would be in existence now.

h.      We have reached an absurd result from assuming that every being is a contingent being.

i.        Therefore not every being is a contingent being.

j.        Therefore some being exists of its own necessity, and does not receive its existence from another being, but rather causes them. This all men speak of as God.

4)     Argument from Gradation of Being – There must be an ultimate standard of good by which we measure all that is good.

a.      There is a gradation to be found in things: some are better or worse than others.

b.      Predications of degree require reference to the “uttermost” case (e.g., a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest).

c.       The maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus.

d.      Therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God.

5)     Argument from Design – The world shows evidence of design therefore it must be designed.

a.      We see that natural bodies work toward some goal, and do not do so by chance.

b.      Most natural things lack knowledge.

c.       But as an arrow reaches its target because it is directed by an archer, what lacks intelligence achieves goals by being directed by something intelligence.

d.      Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.

Cosmological Argument – This is the modern hybrid version of Aquinas’s argument from cause and motion.

Syllogism:

·         Whatever begins to exist has a cause.

·         The Universe began to exist.

·         Therefore, the Universe had a cause.

Objection:

·         If everything must have a first cause then God must have had a cause

·         If God had a cause then he cannot be the uncaused cause

·         If God didn’t have a cause then not everything needs a cause and the universe can be considered “uncaused” or its own cause.

Teleological Argument – This is the modern and revised version of Aquinas’s design argument.

Syllogism:

	Weak Version	Strong Version
Premise A:	The world shows evidence of a design	The world shows evidence of a design
Premise B:	If the world is designed then it must have a designer.	If the world is designed then it must have a designer.
Conclusion:	Therefore a designer exists.	God is that designer and God must exist.

Objection:

·         If the world is so well designed that it requires a designer then God is even more well designed and must have a designer greater than himself.

·         If God didn’t need a designer than neither should a less wonderful thing (the universe).

Moral Argument – This is crudely based on the gradation argument of Aquinas but was refined by C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity.

Syllogism:

·         All people have moral values

·         The existence of these values cannot be explained unless they were implanted in people by God.

·         Morals exist, therefore God exists.

Objection:

·         There is a simpler way to explain morality.

AND

·         If moral values came from God then everyone would have the same moral values

·         People do not have the same moral values

·         Therefore morality did not come from God

Other Arguments

Pascal’s Wager – We can’t know if God exists but if I live as if he does and it turns out that he actually doesn’t exist then I haven’t lost anything. If I live as if he doesn’t exist when he actually does exist then I’ve lost everything. Therefore I should live as if he does exist in case he actually does.

Religious Experience – People claim to have personal experience with God therefore God must exist.

Miracles – Miracles show the presence of a supernatural force (God). Miracles exist therefore God exists.

Conclusion

Many of these arguments have served the church well for centuries. Many are still helpful, insightful, biblical, wise and still hold water. However the primary opponent to Christianity in our day and age is naturalism. Naturalism assumes an anti-theistic worldview that does not allow for supernatural explanations of anything. Many of these arguments are ineffective against this type of thinking because of the pre-determined bias of the opposition. Without addressing that bias the issue is not really being addressed.

Furthermore these arguments, although some of them relatively sound, never point necessarily to Christ. They are arguments for general theism not the God of Christianity (which is our task). A Jew, Muslim or Buddhist could use the cosmological, teleological, moral or ontological argument and simply insert their definition of God so we need to search for an approach to apologetics that will lead us to Christ.

Minor Prophets: Malachi

Malachi: Does it matter how I worship God?

Introduction:

This book is divided six disputes between God and his people. All of the disputes center around the theme of proper worship. They people may or may not have realized that worship was the issue at hand but God saw it that way. In fact I would venture to say due to the rhetorical devices used by God that the people felt somewhat blinded-sided by these accusations. Below are the six disputes broken up by verses. We will not be going through them in order as they are written in chiastic structure so the first section we’ll discuss is dispute 3+4, then 2+5 and finally 1+6.

1)      1:2-5

2)      1:6 – 2:9

3)      2:10 – 16

4)      2:17 – 3:5

5)      3:6-12

6)      3:13 – 4:3

Worship of God involves how we treat other people:

This section is taken from the third and fourth disputes. The first thing we can learn from Malachi is that our worship of God is connected to how we treat other people. Many people think religion or spirituality is our deeply private and inner-most feelings and thoughts about God or ourselves. However this stands in opposition to what the scripture teaches. I won’t toss out any personal aspect of it, it is indeed very personal but it is not merely personal.

Forming and keeping our families - Malachi 2:10-16

The Israelites did not properly worship God with their marriages.

1)      God’s people were marrying those who did not worship the Lord (11).

2)      God’s people were acting faithlessly in their marriages and getting divorces (16).

True worship of God involves honoring God with our families and commitments.

Acting Justly Toward Our Neighbors - Malachi 2:17-3:5

God accuses the Israelites of violating his established justice with their neighbors. Some are engaged in sorcery, adultery, perjury while others oppress the laborers and widows and other still deprive aliens of justice.

So there are those who are simply committing injustice but there is more to it than that. There are also people who are indifferent to justice. Wanna guess what distinction God makes between committing injustice and being indifferent to justice? Little to none is the answer. If you stand in the way of justice or do not care for the victims of injustice then you are indirectly committing an act of injustice. True worship of God involves acting justly towards those around us.

Worship of God involves what we do with ourselves:

This section is taken from the second and fifth disputes.

Giving our Best – Malachi 1:6-2:9

Here we find that the people had indeed been bringing their tithes and offerings to God. So on the surface at least they appear to be righteous and spiritually aligned. But that is not how God saw it, God saw them bringing whatever they could spare when he asks for their best. In this passage (1:13) God calls out the priests for allowing blemished and less than perfect offerings. Why would they do that? Probably because they thought no one would notice, but they were wrong because God noticed. God is (or is supposed to be) the recipient of these offerings, if you don’t think he’s paying attention than what (or who) is the offering actually for? Don’t try to impress others with your offering to God; offerings to God are for God.

Giving our All – Malachi 3:6-12

There are two things required in giving our all to God (at least as it’s meant in this passage). First, by all I mean your whole life. Your offering is not the only part of your life you give to God. Many of us try that though. We think we can partition off part of our time and money and give it to God and that will appease him. Would that work in a marriage? Spending an hour a week with the person and giving them some leftover money? Because marriage is the way God describes his relationship to us in multiple places.

Secondly we need to get in touch with the true God. God reveals himself in scripture and provides us with objective truth about his nature and character. We must seek to know this God and not some God of our culture and times or God of our personal desires or God of what some guy on TV said God is. For example if I said that I know Tom Cruise personally someone might question me about that. If I then said Tom Cruise has blonde hair you would certainly doubt me. What if I then proceeded to say, “Well that’s what Tom Cruise is like for me”? Would you conclude that I really know the real Tom Cruise? What if I seemed really earnest and sincere in my belief? Similarly, if someone says they know God but don’t live, act and think like they know the one true God then it is reasonable to doubt their belief. However I’m not giving this lesson for you to analyze other people but yourself. If you say you know the one true and living God how does it appear in your life?

Giving your all means giving every aspect of your life to the one true God.

Worship of God involves how we approach God:

Understanding God – Malachi 1:1-5

This really stems from the last thing we talked about. Getting to know the true God and understanding Him. We cannot simply project a random image into the sky and worship it, we must get in touch with the one true God.

Fearing God – Malachi 3:13-4:3

This explains our need for true reverence for God. Francis Chan believes that these passages about fearing God are not merely about reverence and I would have to concur but they are no less than that. Part of worshipping God is putting him in his proper place and ourselves in our proper place. The Pharisee and the Tax Collector that Jesus taught about show the contrast in those who fear and do not fear. Worshipping God with fear means not doing so with disrespect, distrust or arrogance.

Hoping in God – Malachi 4:4-6

Last but not least our worship of God should convey the hope we have in God. Notice that the book (and the Old Testament) ends with the phrase “or else”, it also begins that way back in the Garden of Eden. There are remarkable things in these last verses. God also calls his people to reflect on the Moses and Elijah, these same two figures are present at the transfiguration in the Gospels. But I digress… ultimately our hope is in God. We hope in Him because we trust in him and we trust because he has revealed himself to be good.

Conclusion, Jesus & the Gospel

Clearly in this last book of the Old Testament it showed that God cares deeply about how he’s worshipped. Did all of this end on page later in the New Testament? Does God still care? Do we act like he still cares? How do you worship? Do you just sing songs and stay awake through a sermon? Do you even do that much?

Ultimately I believe God is most glorified in the proclamation of His gospel. When His one, true, authentic and objective gospel is presented he receives all the glory. There is no room for us to boast. This is why I am so personally insistent on churches proclaiming the gospel every time they gather.

How is the gospel present in Malachi? How isn’t it? The simplest explanation would be to go to the very beginning where God shows that he has loved and gifted the people with mercy and grace before they did their actions and he continues to do it in spite of their disobedience and half-heartedness. This is the good news, God loves first. He loves, gives, sacrifices and pours out mercy and grace while we are still sinners!

How is Jesus foreshadowed here? Quite simply we need a better priest. Jesus, according to Hebrews, is our ultimate high priest. He brings proper offering to God on our behalf and we receive the blessing. Not only do the Jewish people receive a better high priest but chapter 1 verse 5 foreshadows that God will redeem people of all nations (beyond the border of Israel).