Mitch Stokes is a Christian philosopher who had the good fortune to study under some of the most influential Christian thinkers of our day. For some people that might conjure up big ticket names such as Billy Graham, or John Stott, maybe Ravi Zacharias. Yet others might think of Joel Osteen or Jerry Falwell. And still others might focus on the very idea of whether or not a Christian might legitimately be interested in philosophy in the first place. However the names that he studied under, Alvin Plantinga. Nicholas Wolterstorff and others may not seem household names, but in philosophy their influence is profound. To many unfortunately, reason and rationality are mistakenly perceived as the enemy, of our faith,. In fact this attitude that reigns very strongly in certain quarters of Evangelicalism has been responsible for the continued marginalization of the Christian voice in many Western and increasingly secular countries.
Here is a guest post by Mitch Stokes PhD. from Crossway about the role of apologetics:
Let’s roughly define apologetics as the use of arguments to remove doubt or unbelief (I’ll qualify this in the next point). The point here is that unbelief often comes from our own hearts and minds, despite the fact that we’re Christians. For my own part, apologetics has always been something I do as much for me as for others.
Here’s the qualifier I mentioned above: although we often use apologetic arguments to remove doubts, we can also use them to prevent doubts. Teaching apologetics to young believers can be a preemptive strike on unbelief.
This won’t prevent all doubting, but it can certainly mitigate it. This point is particularly important for parents. Notice that points (1) and (2) imply that apologetics is for absolutely everyone—Christians and non-Christians, doubters and non-doubters (i.e., not-currently-doubters).
Ultimately, we know that Christianity is true because the Holy Spirit opens our eyes to its truth (which should remind us to steep our apologetics in prayer).
That’s not to say that arguments can’t confirm or further support our Spirit-induced belief—or that arguments are never part of coming to faith—but the arguments we use on ourselves are sometimes different from the arguments we use to try to show someone else that Christianity is true.
Be realistic and avoid the temptation to think that in order to address your neighbor’s skepticism you must first have all the answers. No one has all the answers. When you don’t know something, say so and be fine with it. Know your limits.
This isn’t an excuse to be sloppy or to avoid the hard work of study, but rather an encouragement to be humble, and to therefore be relaxed and gentle. Also, be prepared to come to the realization that the more you learn, the more you’ll see how complicated the issues are. This is just a design feature of learning.
Although there may be strong arguments for Christianity, none of them is absolutely compelling, forcing everyone to believe the conclusion upon pain of irrationality. To put it differently, there are no proofs for Christianity in the strong sense of "proof."
This shouldn’t be troubling—after all, there are few, if any, arguments whose conclusion can’t be avoided somehow—even if this avoidance puts the person into some intellectual contortions. Can you prove that there is actually a computer in front of you and that you’re not in the Matrix? No. So don’t expect more from arguments than they can deliver.
We can often mistake the strength of our commitment to Jesus for the rational strength of our arguments for Christianity. Properly acknowledging the limitations of an argument doesn’t imply that you’re somehow hedging on your profession of faith. Similarly, acknowledging that there are good arguments for atheism or agnosticism doesn’t mean that you’re being disloyal.
A watershed experience for me in graduate school was seeing equally brilliant philosophers, each of whom knew all the same arguments, come to wildly different conclusions. When we evaluate arguments, all of us weigh them against our own unique set of background beliefs, experiences, temperaments, proclivities, and emotions.
And though this doesn’t mean that “anything goes” when evaluating arguments, neither are arguments purely a matter of logic and observation. Everyone is unique and no one is neutral. By the way, none of this implies that truth is relative.
This will be controversial among die-hard devotees to specific methods, but don’t get too caught up in “schools” of apologetic method. It is helpful to become familiar with them, and even fine to have a favorite, but the best “method” for the job will depend on many factors. Some of these factors include your background/expertise, interests, personality, and temperament (as well as those of your audience). Your approach will also depend on the physical setting. A lecture hall is different from a coffee shop or the internet.
Again, this doesn’t mean that just any old thing is fine—or that all methods or approaches are equally good. I sometimes think of it in terms of learning martial arts styles: it’s best to learn a number of them, taking the things that work best (for you) from each one. Learn them but don’t get too distracted with their categorization.
Changing someone’s mind isn’t the only goal of apologetics. In fact, that’s unlikely to happen in the moment. Rather, think of any apologetic encounter as planting a seed that will come to fruition later. Or perhaps you’re simply helping prepare the soil so that someone else can plant.
That’s not to say you shouldn’t pray for God to do big things, but remember that we often don’t get to see firsthand those big things. So you shouldn’t be discouraged (or angry or defensive) when the person you’re talking with doesn’t agree with you. It’s not all on your shoulders.
It’s easy to get caught up in ideas, concepts, and arguments—especially for people who are naturally drawn to apologetics. But apologetics is a means to an end, a means of helping people to live for Jesus.
An apologetic encounter isn’t a sales pitch; neither is it a fight (my above martial arts example was a training metaphor, not one about attitude). Love the people you come into contact with. Ask them questions and genuinely listen to their answers. Be gentle and humble.
Be like Jesus. Mitch Stokes at Crossway
Mitch Stokes (PhD, University of Notre Dame) is a senior fellow of philosophy at New St. Andrews College in Moscow, Idaho. In addition to studying philosophy under world-renowned philosopher Alvin Plantinga, Stokes holds degrees in religion and mechanical engineering, and holds five patents in aeroderivative gas turbine technology. His most recent book is How to Be an Atheist: Why Many Skeptics Aren't Skeptical Enough.
Years ago, the Christian thinker C.S. Lewis opined-
So, unlike many who grimace at the thought of Christians involved in philosophy, so long as we distinguish between the wisdom of God, and the wisdom that comes from below, rather than finding a proof-text for discouraging the Christian from thinking in more philosophically adept ways, we should acknowledge that in today's philosophically driven world that this discipline is a prerequisite for disarming the ever more sophisticated attempts to presume that other worldviews are equal to or superior to the wisdom that comes from above. Philosophy, whether it is recognized or not, is what steers our ship. But it is not merely the individual's ship, it is the ship we call culture. The society in which we live and move and raise our children in. Here is a classic reason from the scriptures to engage in philosophy, because our world is driven by ideas that do not "bow their knee to Christ"
In todays world, without a fundamental grasp of the discipline of ordered thinking that is taught in philosophy, there is very little ability to "tear down arguments" that oppose the knowledge of God. It is difficult enough even with some knowledge of ordered thinking.
Here is a video that demonstrates I hope, something of why it is that every Christian is called to give a reason of their hope. To give a defense of the faith. This is the unadulterated version of Stokes' video showing the early skeptic empiricist David Hume and how Hume's skepticism couldn't really account for reason and logic without reference to reason.
Here is a guest post by Mitch Stokes PhD. from Crossway about the role of apologetics:
1. Apologetics is as much for believers as it is for unbelievers.
Let’s roughly define apologetics as the use of arguments to remove doubt or unbelief (I’ll qualify this in the next point). The point here is that unbelief often comes from our own hearts and minds, despite the fact that we’re Christians. For my own part, apologetics has always been something I do as much for me as for others.
2. Apologetics can be used preemptively.
Here’s the qualifier I mentioned above: although we often use apologetic arguments to remove doubts, we can also use them to prevent doubts. Teaching apologetics to young believers can be a preemptive strike on unbelief.
This won’t prevent all doubting, but it can certainly mitigate it. This point is particularly important for parents. Notice that points (1) and (2) imply that apologetics is for absolutely everyone—Christians and non-Christians, doubters and non-doubters (i.e., not-currently-doubters).
3. There is a difference between knowing that Christianity is true and showing that it’s true.
Ultimately, we know that Christianity is true because the Holy Spirit opens our eyes to its truth (which should remind us to steep our apologetics in prayer).
That’s not to say that arguments can’t confirm or further support our Spirit-induced belief—or that arguments are never part of coming to faith—but the arguments we use on ourselves are sometimes different from the arguments we use to try to show someone else that Christianity is true.
4. No one has all the answers.
Be realistic and avoid the temptation to think that in order to address your neighbor’s skepticism you must first have all the answers. No one has all the answers. When you don’t know something, say so and be fine with it. Know your limits.
This isn’t an excuse to be sloppy or to avoid the hard work of study, but rather an encouragement to be humble, and to therefore be relaxed and gentle. Also, be prepared to come to the realization that the more you learn, the more you’ll see how complicated the issues are. This is just a design feature of learning.
5. There are no airtight arguments.
Although there may be strong arguments for Christianity, none of them is absolutely compelling, forcing everyone to believe the conclusion upon pain of irrationality. To put it differently, there are no proofs for Christianity in the strong sense of "proof."
This shouldn’t be troubling—after all, there are few, if any, arguments whose conclusion can’t be avoided somehow—even if this avoidance puts the person into some intellectual contortions. Can you prove that there is actually a computer in front of you and that you’re not in the Matrix? No. So don’t expect more from arguments than they can deliver.
6. Don’t mistake the strength of your loyalty to Christ for the strength of your argument.
We can often mistake the strength of our commitment to Jesus for the rational strength of our arguments for Christianity. Properly acknowledging the limitations of an argument doesn’t imply that you’re somehow hedging on your profession of faith. Similarly, acknowledging that there are good arguments for atheism or agnosticism doesn’t mean that you’re being disloyal.
7. The strength of arguments is person-relative.
A watershed experience for me in graduate school was seeing equally brilliant philosophers, each of whom knew all the same arguments, come to wildly different conclusions. When we evaluate arguments, all of us weigh them against our own unique set of background beliefs, experiences, temperaments, proclivities, and emotions.
And though this doesn’t mean that “anything goes” when evaluating arguments, neither are arguments purely a matter of logic and observation. Everyone is unique and no one is neutral. By the way, none of this implies that truth is relative.
8. Apologetic method is person-relative.
This will be controversial among die-hard devotees to specific methods, but don’t get too caught up in “schools” of apologetic method. It is helpful to become familiar with them, and even fine to have a favorite, but the best “method” for the job will depend on many factors. Some of these factors include your background/expertise, interests, personality, and temperament (as well as those of your audience). Your approach will also depend on the physical setting. A lecture hall is different from a coffee shop or the internet.
Again, this doesn’t mean that just any old thing is fine—or that all methods or approaches are equally good. I sometimes think of it in terms of learning martial arts styles: it’s best to learn a number of them, taking the things that work best (for you) from each one. Learn them but don’t get too distracted with their categorization.
9. Apologetics is more a matter of planting than a matter of harvesting.
Changing someone’s mind isn’t the only goal of apologetics. In fact, that’s unlikely to happen in the moment. Rather, think of any apologetic encounter as planting a seed that will come to fruition later. Or perhaps you’re simply helping prepare the soil so that someone else can plant.
That’s not to say you shouldn’t pray for God to do big things, but remember that we often don’t get to see firsthand those big things. So you shouldn’t be discouraged (or angry or defensive) when the person you’re talking with doesn’t agree with you. It’s not all on your shoulders.
10. Apologetics is ultimately about people.
It’s easy to get caught up in ideas, concepts, and arguments—especially for people who are naturally drawn to apologetics. But apologetics is a means to an end, a means of helping people to live for Jesus.
An apologetic encounter isn’t a sales pitch; neither is it a fight (my above martial arts example was a training metaphor, not one about attitude). Love the people you come into contact with. Ask them questions and genuinely listen to their answers. Be gentle and humble.
Be like Jesus. Mitch Stokes at Crossway
Mitch Stokes (PhD, University of Notre Dame) is a senior fellow of philosophy at New St. Andrews College in Moscow, Idaho. In addition to studying philosophy under world-renowned philosopher Alvin Plantinga, Stokes holds degrees in religion and mechanical engineering, and holds five patents in aeroderivative gas turbine technology. His most recent book is How to Be an Atheist: Why Many Skeptics Aren't Skeptical Enough.
Years ago, the Christian thinker C.S. Lewis opined-
"To be ignorant and simple now—not to be able to meet the enemies on their own ground—would be to throw down our weapons. . . . Good philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because bad philosophy needs to be answered.”
Bad philosophy needs to be answered. But why? Because bad philosophy leads to a bad world. Philosophy comes from an amalgam of Greek words that combine to mean a love of wisdom. And we know that Christ is our Wisdom. We also know that philosophy is very much into thinking logically and in a disciplined way that helps us spot fallacies, promote truth and better reflect that which is real. Again we understand that this is linked to Christ who is the Word come down from heaven and who became flesh and dwelt among us. The Greek word for that "Word" is Logos, from which we get the word "logic". He is our reasoning Word.So, unlike many who grimace at the thought of Christians involved in philosophy, so long as we distinguish between the wisdom of God, and the wisdom that comes from below, rather than finding a proof-text for discouraging the Christian from thinking in more philosophically adept ways, we should acknowledge that in today's philosophically driven world that this discipline is a prerequisite for disarming the ever more sophisticated attempts to presume that other worldviews are equal to or superior to the wisdom that comes from above. Philosophy, whether it is recognized or not, is what steers our ship. But it is not merely the individual's ship, it is the ship we call culture. The society in which we live and move and raise our children in. Here is a classic reason from the scriptures to engage in philosophy, because our world is driven by ideas that do not "bow their knee to Christ"
"For though we live in the flesh, we do not wage war according to the flesh. The weapons of our warfare are not the weapons of the world. Instead, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We tear down arguments, and every presumption set up against the knowledge of God; and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.…"
In todays world, without a fundamental grasp of the discipline of ordered thinking that is taught in philosophy, there is very little ability to "tear down arguments" that oppose the knowledge of God. It is difficult enough even with some knowledge of ordered thinking.
Here is a video that demonstrates I hope, something of why it is that every Christian is called to give a reason of their hope. To give a defense of the faith. This is the unadulterated version of Stokes' video showing the early skeptic empiricist David Hume and how Hume's skepticism couldn't really account for reason and logic without reference to reason.
The next video is one in which an atheist takes issue with Stokes' views.
No comments:
Post a Comment