Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
The Harvester Podcast is brought to you by the Florida School of Preaching. Listen weekly to take a dive into biblical topics and thoughtful studies on things that matter to our eternal souls.
Welcome to the Harvester Podcast, a work of the Florida School of Preaching.
I am your host today, Steven Ford, and joining me today
George Beals.
We are in season three, episode two of our podcast.
In this season, we are focusing on lessons on Christian apologetics.
In episode one, Brother George led us through part one of some introductory groundwork.
And in this second episode, we're going to add some more to this introductory material.
So Brother George, picking up where we left off, where are we gonna start today?
Well I thought we would do some review to begin with, a review of the previous lesson and
then after we do that we'll get into some additional introductory material.
Okay, sounds good.
Where we started, we were in 1 Peter 3.15.
The idea was we need to be able to make a defense.
And there are several passages to which we appealed.
uh Verse was in, well, not first, but among them was Acts chapter 2, which was a great
demonstration of what it looks like to lay out the evidence and the hope.
It gives you this, uh it's kind of a summary of what it means to defend the truth or
defend the gospel.
Right, in Acts chapter 2 verses 1 through 35 plus verse 39 we have evidence or premises as
logicians call that to the conclusion that is stated in verse 36, Therefore let all the
house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus whom you crucified both Lord
and Christ.
So that's the conclusion.
And that is an example in the scriptures of carrying out 1 Peter chapter 3 verse 15.
Another example of that on two occasions is in Acts chapter 17.
So if I could just go over to 1 Peter chapter 3 verse 15 by way of summary, this reads,
sanctify the Lord God in your hearts and always be ready to give a defense.
That translates the word apologia in the Greek.
a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you with meekness and
fear.
And we talked about that in some detail.
That word defense then is used by the Apostle Paul over in Philippians 1.7 to defending
the gospel.
And it's also used in a secular context as Festus uses it in Acts 25 verse 6 in context
where he is explaining he the Roman official Festus.
is explaining that a Roman has the legal right to have an opportunity of defense before
his accusers.
So 1 Peter 3.15 is giving the reader the bold challenge to defend the, in essence,
biblical Christianity with adequate reasons.
Okay, that is where we were treading and that's kind of an important piece to add to our
knowledge when we're trying to say, how do I defend the truth?
Where do I need to go?
And to what scriptures do I appeal?
ah Not every single verse is one that we might demonstrate how to know that God exists,
how to know that the Bible is His Word.
And so knowing some of these things is gonna be very helpful for us.
Yeah.
And, um, the passage also indicates, as we pointed out last time, how to give a defense
notice says asks you for a reason, be able to give a defense to everyone who asks you for
a reason for the hope that is in you.
And so then a reason for the hope that is in you, can picture two blocks, uh, tall, call
the label, the first one, a reason or reasons in the plural.
and a downward arrow from there into a second block called hope.
And all of that is how we give a defense.
We noticed other passages as well as we've already indicated in Paul in Acts 17 and also
Peter in Acts chapter 2.
In other words, we need to cite adequate evidence in a logical argument that proves Bible
teachings are true.
Prove all things, hold fast that which is good.
First that's audience 521.
person needs to be able to do that.
that's a, excuse me, that takes us to where we were leaving off last time.
We need to be able to prove and demonstrate.
And Paul, he's a great example of that.
He did that on multiple occasions.
We started in Acts 17 where he's opening and alleging that King James uses those terms.
So he's proving.
Another one I love to look at just as an example of him doing that is 1 Corinthians
chapter 15.
where he's proving and demonstrating how that Christ is in fact raised from the dead and
that is an adequate teaching.
Oh yeah, that's a wonderful passage.
It gives a lot of information.
Much can be said.
We could have a session or two just on 1 Corinthians 15, but also not but, but in addition
to that, let me point out that, that we're, we're interested in this study in the basic
theme of the Bible.
That is to say, just what overall are we to defend?
And if you were to boil down the whole Bible into a single statement,
That statement would be along these lines, Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that to be
saved from the consequence of sin one must believe in, love, and obey Him.
That's the overall theme of the scriptures.
And the point here of course is that every book of the Bible, we could show every chapter
of every book, every verse, and every chapter, either directly or indirectly, is like a
tributary.
uh
that flows into this uh single river that's uh meandering through the scriptures and that
overall river of course is that Jesus Christ is who he claimed to be and that we can be
saved through him.
So all of the parts of the Bible are contributing toward that end.
So that's the basic theme, the overall theme if you were to boil it down.
of the scriptures and then we raise the question, well what is the basic argument then
that has this basic theme as its conclusion?
And we talked in some detail about the fact that that basic argument is God exists and the
Bible is the Word of God and the Bible teaches this theme given all of those three then it
does fall that that theme is true.
That is
If we can demonstrate that God exists and the Bible is His Word and the Bible teaches this
theme that that theme therefore is a true statement.
Now that would have to be the case because if in fact we can show that the Bible is God's
Word, the Word of a being who knows everything and never lies, then it would have to be
the case that whenever God is presenting His case in the scriptures that that case, that
statement, would have to be true.
Absolutely.
So in fact then, what is the argument that shows any doctrine of the Bible teaches, that
the Bible teaches is true?
Not just that theme.
Well, it would be the same structure.
Since God exists and the Bible is the Word of God and the Bible teaches doctrine X, then
that doctrine X, let that stand for a teaching in the Bible where God is presenting His
case, that would have to be a true statement.
And so when we're building our cases, if you will, the first peg has to be, we have to be
able to defend the fact that God exists.
Without that, everything else falls.
Right.
And furthermore, why would anyone want to read the Bible if it's just the words of men?
I mean, you may want to read it out of interest or maybe some kind of a historical
motivation, but it wouldn't be any different than, uh, maybe, maybe it, maybe it has some
profound wisdom in it here and there like other human doctrine documents do.
But the point here is that the Bible is more than just the words of
those that were involved in its composition.
There is something beyond that is that we can identify when we get to the argument for the
Bible as being the word of God, will show that it is the word of an intelligence that
transcends the combined intelligences of its human writers.
Absolutely agree with that 100 % the the thing is if if a person with I would say an
honest heart Reads the scriptures.
I think the only conclusion that you can come away with it.
There is in fact a divine Uncreated self-existent being that is intelligent that has
created the world around us
And as we read the scriptures, tells us who that being is.
And even in the natural revelation, that's one of the other really neat things is that the
Bible tells us that there is a natural revelation that can be found.
And even if you didn't know that, you would have to come to a conclusion that there is, at
the very least, I would say, some power, force, creator behind the things that we see.
only that, that being is greater than what you might find in the Star Wars series, which
says it is just an impersonal force.
Rather, ah there is uh purpose and there are qualities such as love and justice and so
forth.
These are personal qualities that we witness in this natural world, and so then we have to
account for that.
uh
the ultimate being is that caused all of this, he must be of such a nature that he is
personal in order to account for the fact that we do see uh personal qualities in this
life.
It's not just a mechanistic thing.
Absolutely, and that there is intelligence.
If there is just some sort of energy, that doesn't account for the intelligence that we
see in the world around us.
Right, and of course we're going to get into in more detail when we get into the arguments
for the existence of God.
We'll look at that in some more detail.
If I may raise the question here, then well, what conclusions then are we to defend and
what will we be defending with adequate evidence in this series?
Well, there are several evidence that God exists, evidence that the Bible is His word,
evidence that the Bible teaches that Jesus is deity.
adequate evidence that he rose from the dead.
Evidence of course to substantiate the overall theme of the Bible that Jesus Christ is the
Son of God and to be saved one must believe in love and obey him.
So that is by way of review what we talked about last time.
Now I'd like for us to proceed with additional material in this lesson number two.
Okay, so where do we begin now?
We've got lesson one.
Let's suppose that we understand those premises and we've got them.
So now if we're going to continue our uh pursuit of this introduction to apologetics, once
we have these things kind of at hand, where do we go?
What would be a great place to go from here?
Well, I think it's important that we identify what we mean by God in this series.
all sorts of definitions of God that are out there have been for centuries.
We're talking about the being who is infinite in all the attributes.
That is the being described in the Bible as the living and true God.
First Thessalonians 1.9.
And notice that terminology, the living and true God, rather than a dead and false God.
This being is described in the scriptures as eternal, Psalm 90 verse 2, all-powerful,
Matthew 19, 26, all knowledgeable, that is, has all the knowledge that there is to have,
Psalm 139, all loving, 1 John chapter 4 verse 8, repeated in verse 16, omnipresent, this
is sometimes called his ubiquitousness, he's present everywhere, Psalm 139 verse 10,
He is immutable in his nature.
Immutable means he does not change in his nature.
Malachi chapter 3 verse 6.
He's always just, he's always fair.
Deuteronomy 32 verse 4.
That is, we are not discussing some lesser being like the so-called gods of some of the
ancient Egyptians and the Greeks and the Romans.
If you look at them, the writings that come down to us describing them, they are cranky
with one another.
uh Zeus throws a lightning bolt at Hephaestus and causes him to uh limp from that point
onward and the other gods laugh at him and so forth.
Obviously these are just figments or creations by human beings of so-called gods made in
human image.
Rather we're talking about the Omni-God.
That's the god that we're talking about in
this series of lessons as we carry out 1st Peter 3 verse 15 in defending biblical truth.
This is, I think, uh so important for individuals to understand because if you have, if
you've listened to any sorts of debates on the existence of God, if you're familiar with
it, for any of our listeners, very often you will hear so many people start off on the
wrong foot.
by that I mean to say that they start by defining a God that is not the God of the Bible.
So they'll start by saying, you believe in some magic man in the sky.
They'll start to uh explain or
know, appeal to some of these gods of, you know, the Egyptians or the Romans or the Greeks
or any of these, you know, false gods of various people groups.
And they'll start to tear down those things.
And this is not the God that we are putting forth.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
And uh another thing to uh mention here is that if we're, if we can substantiate the
conclusion that the God described in the Bible exists, then uh take for example his
omnipotence, that is he has all the power that there is to have.
These omni-attributes, um
imply that they can only be one.
So these attributes that we have in the scriptures describing the living and true God
imply that we do not have a multiplicity.
If you've got an omnipotent being then there can't be anybody else that would challenge
that, any other being.
And so then monotheism is implied by these attributes given to uh the living and true God
in the scriptures.
That's a great point.
That's one of things that you kind of pick up on when you look at the mythologies around
the world that there are equals on opposite sides of spectrum.
So there's one who may have a power level of 100 that's good.
And then there's another evil on the other side that has a power level of 100 and they
kind of battle against one another.
That would be a contradiction and all contradictions are false.
So next, by way of introductory material as we continue with uh eventually getting into
defense of the existence of God and the Bible's being the word of God, are some terms that
some people find helpful when explaining objects and I think the value of this will be
better understood as we...
proceed.
Aristotle came up with four so-called causes and instead of causes you might think of
these as explanations or characterizations of objects.
They provide ways by which we can explain objects and he talked about a material cause
that would be the stuff out of which an object is made.
A formal cause or explanation or characterization that is
the shape of the object.
has to be more than just the stuff out there.
It has to be combined into a particular shape in order to be something, but we would
identify as something.
Furthermore, there was a final cause by which he meant the end or the purpose of the
object.
And then a biggie here, of course, is there is an efficient cause and that refers to the
design or the, and or the designer or the maker.
of the object.
let's look at some examples of objects.
Take a house for example.
uh we can describe it.
This gives us insight into how to describe it with some detail.
The material cause would be the stuff out of which it is made.
Maybe brick and mortar and shingles and so forth.
uh And then the formal cause would be the shape.
Maybe a ranch into a ranch.
And then the final cause of purpose of the end of the object, well, that would be for
human beings to dwell in, to live in.
And then the efficient cause in this case would be the blueprint, that's the design or the
designer or the maker of the object.
The blueprint and or the general contractor and the carpenters and so forth, all of that.
Here you have a multiplicity of efficient causes.
Well, let's look at an acorn.
and describe it.
What is the material cause of an acorn?
Well, you could get into the detail, the chemical makeup of the acorn, uh the stuff out of
which it is made.
The formal cause is the shape of the thing, uh some would say the essence of the object.
uh The final cause, uh well, here you get into the distinction that Aristotle made with
respect to potential and actuality.
That is, the potential of the acorn is to become an oak tree.
And if nothing interferes with that, then of course that then is actualized into an oak
tree.
So there you have the purpose of the end of the object.
And the efficient cause, now that's a wonderful question, what's the efficient cause of
the acorn?
Well, you could say in a short
cited way you could say well the the uh...
efficient cause of the acorn was uh...
the oak tree and then the efficient cause of that was the acorn before that oak tree etc
but what about the ultimate efficient cause how do you explain that and that's a wonderful
question of course to deal with and which is precisely what we will be dealing with and
then how about the bread of the Lord's Supper
Well, the material cause would be the unleavened bread.
The formal cause would be the shape of the thing, maybe a little rectangle or a loaf or
whatever.
But end of the purpose of this object is to uh be a remembrance of uh the body of Jesus
Christ that was sacrificed on the cross.
And uh the efficient cause, quite interesting, that would be the baker.
But who made the baker?
And then furthermore the ingredients the stuff the material cause of that uh Bread of the
Lord's Supper.
What is its ultimate cause?
nice wonderful question to contemplate and then we can look at How about the universe?
What's the material cause of the universe?
What's the formal cause?
What's the final cause?
What's the efficient cause?
And then how about the human being?
What's the material cause someone said?
uh
a while ago if you add up all the ingredients of the uh...
of the human being the body of the human being it came out to be just a few dollars worth
of material
In fact, that's consistent with the scriptures.
are made of earth and thus we shall go according to the Bible in Ecclesiastes 12 verse 7.
And then what is the final cause?
Well, that's an interesting question.
What's the final cause?
What's the end or the purpose of our being here in this life?
Wonderful question to contemplate and look at.
And then of course the efficient cause.
Again, someone could say, well, the efficient cause of me would be my biological parents.
And what's the efficient cause of them?
Well, they're biological parents, but all right, let's raise the question.
What's the ultimate efficient cause then?
A wonderful question for us to contemplate.
So these are terms that many find helpful when explaining objects, and we'll employ that
in just a moment as we proceed, not just a moment, but I mean in subsequent lessons.
And then the double edge of first Thessalonians 521.
I'd like for us to look at that first.
is what I was really interested in kind of hearing.
Well this passage reads in the American Standard Version, Prove all things, that's prove
all things, hold fast that which is good, abstain from every form of evil.
1 Thessalonians 5, 21 to 22, nicely translated in the American Standard Version of 1901.
So honesty compels us to understand that if you think about this passage very carefully
that
We have a double-edged responsibility here.
Whenever we travel from evidence to conclusion, that is whenever we're developing and
thinking through an argument, we want to be very careful and to make sure that we have
adequate evidence, to have sufficient evidence before we buy, so to speak, the conclusion.
So that is guiding us against gullibility.
When there's insufficient evidence, then
Do not yet conclude.
Do not conclude or least do not yet conclude.
Withhold belief.
Wait.
On the other hand, the other edge here is that when there is sufficient evidence, then
honesty compels us to go ahead, do conclude, believe when there is sufficient evidence,
believe in that conclusion.
And so then we have this wonderfully insightful
double edge that becomes apparent when we think carefully about the meaning of first S
only is 521.
This is in other words, as logicians would put it, the so-called law of rationality.
This is expressing the law of rationality, which states uh we must draw only those
conclusions that are warranted by the evidence.
When there's insufficient evidence, hold on, don't conclude yet.
And then if there is sufficient evidence, go ahead and do conclude.
And so then the double edge of First Thessalonians 521, the law of rationality is that it
guards against gullibility and it guards against skepticism.
So that first clause, prove all things, put all things to the test, examine all things,
that would guard us against being gullible and just kind of buying anything that just
comes out.
And what a bold challenge that is I know it to the reader here.
We have a book.
This was written 2,000 years ago uh that uh if the Bible is uh refutable then It's
shooting itself in the foot here But it's quite and isn't this what you would expect the
challenge to be to its reader if in fact it is the word of
And if you had men who understood that there are other philosophers or writers that could
be smarter than themselves, they would not have put forth such a challenge.
They would have just simply said maybe something like, take our word for it, we've already
tested this, we've already proved these things.
They wouldn't challenge further generations.
Yeah, absolutely.
So that second clause then to hold fast to that which is good is telling us once we have
examined, once we have proved, that would protect us against, I guess, the skepticism or,
you know.
letting things just sail by.
So once you prove it, then you need to grab it, you need to hold on to it, you need to
obey it, you need to do everything you can to not let that truth go.
I would say the double edge is inherent in the first clause, prove all things.
And then having done that, and you've distinguished between what's good and what's evil,
then of course you want to follow the good and avoid the evil, which is exactly pointed
out in verse 22, abstain from every form of evil.
Absolutely.
first we're getting to those terms.
Now we've gotten to this double edge of the law of rationality that's put forth very, very
plain.
I'm glad the way you explained that in 1 Thessalonians 5 and verse number 21.
now there is, if I remember correctly from our last episode, we're going to get into a
little bit of this spectrum.
Right, so if we step back and think about belief in God and the positions, the various
positions that have been taken and are taken by individuals, it can be expressed by what I
call a spectrum of belief in God.
So if you were to draw a horizontal line left to right, way over on the left, then uh mark
that end uh with a vertical line and call that atheist.
And this is the position, I know God does not exist.
And then way over on the other end, over on the right hand side, call that vertical line,
draw a vertical line there, call that the theist.
This is the person that says, I know that God does exist.
And then there's the view right smack in the middle, which I call the pure agnostic.
And this has two flavors.
The first flavor is, I do not know
Whether God exists or not, I have absolutely no idea, but perhaps somebody else does know.
In other words, this person is saying, I personally do not know, but I'm open to the
possibility that maybe somebody else does.
And then the second flavor of pure agnosticism, as I call it, uh is I do not know and no
one can know.
That's the claim.
And then furthermore, in between the atheist and the pure agnostic,
is the person that we can label as the atheistic agnostic.
That is the atheistic leaning agnostic.
He says, I do not know, but probably God does not exist.
And then finally in between the pure agnostic and the theist is the individual who can be
characterized as a theistic agnostic.
He says, I do not know, but probably God does exist.
And of course, where
defending the theist view.
We're going to defend, consistent with the claim of Romans 1.20, for example, in Psalm 19,
1 through 6, we are defending the view, the biblical view, that we can know that God
exists, that he has certainty about it.
Now, along these lines, I think it's important to be very careful with the particular idea
that arises, a claim that is oftentimes made in
among professed Christians.
And that is the claim is that the Holy Spirit operates directly on the mind to cause
belief.
That is to say there is the view that is traceable back largely to another claim namely
that the first sin impaired the human mind's ability to reason to God.
Since that point in Genesis 3, since sin entered
the unaided human mind cannot reason to God, according to this claim.
And therefore, a direct intervention of the Holy Spirit is needed to bring us to the
conclusion, the knowledge, the certainty that God exists.
And thus, the two corresponding doctrines, one is called the so-called noetic fall,
N-O-E-T-I-C, that new word noetic,
is an English word that comes from the Greek word know, which means I know, one of the
Greek words for knowledge, knowing.
And the claim here is that when sin entered then the mind fell and was no longer able to
have certainty on certain key principles, doctrines.
And this therefore requires Holy Spirit illumination as it's called in order for a person
to believe.
Now this is applied in different ways.
uh Some would apply it to uh knowing, believing that God exists.
You can't do that on your own.
You cannot use your own mind uh and deduce from the evidence around us and in us that
therefore I know that God exists.
That of course is a violation of Romans 1.20 and Psalm 19.1-6.
uh
Another application of this is, know, I believe that Jesus is the Son of God.
Well, you can't do that until the Holy Spirit illuminates you.
Or, I believe, I know that the Bible teaches a particular doctrine.
Now, let me pause here for a moment and point out that as a matter of interest at this
point in the study, what does the Bible teach about how one comes to belief in God?
Well, the Roman, the well-known Romans 1.20 answers this clearly.
This passage reads, since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes are clearly
seen, note, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and
Godhead or divinity, so that they are without excuse.
Now notice carefully, what is clearly seen or understood without excuse?
By what means is this understood?
And then when is this understood?
And furthermore, is the passage referring to the biblical God?
So again, according to the Bible in Romans 1.20, there is adequate evidence in nature, in
the natural world, for the human mind to conclude with clarity that God exists.
Psalm 19 teaches the same thing.
In other words, you have adequate evidence from which we deduce therefore that God exists.
And so then it is important to understand again, according to Romans 1.20, the biblical
claim,
And that is that we have the ability, we human beings, since creation notice, up to the
time that Paul is writing in the first century AD, that's up to and including Genesis
three and after Genesis three, right up to the present time, since that time, we, that his
invisible attributes are clearly seen, there's not a noetic fall here, clearly seen
being understood and now we have what is called the dative of means that is by means of
the things that are made.
So we look at this universe and through that means our mind examines that evidence and
concludes should conclude without it without uh excuse therefore that not only that God
exists but even certain attributes he has namely eternal power and divinity.
So that's important to understand and we are
defending Romans chapter 1 verse 20.
Not the idea that our minds have fallen and therefore we cannot come to these conclusions.
Quite to the contrary, there is adequate evidence available to us today from which we can
deduce that God exists.
So that's the essence of today's class.
I do want to say what is coming in the next class, but maybe Stephen you have a thought.
Yeah, just want to add that, you know, the, the, the, one of the things that you mentioned
goes right into one of the false teachings of Calvinism that, you know, the mind is, we're
totally, completely depraved.
The mind is unable to reach for, search for, understand the things of God.
And Romans one is so clear to the contrary.
I mean, it says in verse 18, for the wrath of God is revealed from heaven.
Why?
against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who hold the truth and unrighteousness
because that which may be known of God is manifest in them.
For God has showed it to them.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen being
understood by the things that are made even his eternal power in Godhead so that they, who
is it they?
Those unrighteous ones.
They're without excuse.
So if in fact the mind is completely depraved,
We're unable to understand, unable to know, unable to reach for God.
Why does God say that they are without excuse?
Exactly.
And, and furthermore notice that it says since the creation of from the creation of the
world and he's writing in the first century.
So that, that, uh, refers from Genesis to Genesis one all the way up to the first century.
That's after Genesis three, after sentient into the world.
Furthermore, he specifies the means by which we come to such without excuse knowledge,
namely by means of the things that are made.
We, we look at the things that are made and
and should deduce from that that therefore the biblical God exists.
That is clearly talking about the biblical God.
When the Bible talks about God in existence, it's talking about the biblical God.
And therefore belief in God is, there is adequate evidence for us to conclude that God
exists and therefore,
For those that do not come to that conclusion, it's not a matter of lack of evidence,
maybe a lack of will, but not a lack of evidence.
Absolutely.
So this was a great way to kind of uh put a button, if you will, on this introduction
material so that we can say, all right, if we're going to start the study of apologetics,
if we want to study how that we can make a defense from God, what you really have put
forth already is a great way to kind of start this journey.
So in our third episode, where will we go?
Well, with this preliminary material now behind us, I'd like for us now to take in logical
sequence the argument that we specified, that is, that first God exists and then the Bible
is the Word of God.
We'll give an argument for that.
And then we'll look at certain biblical teachings.
And for next class, I'd like for us to focus in on arguments on the existence of God.
And in particular, we'll look at what is called the design argument.
This is sometimes called the teleological argument for the existence of God and we'll get
into more detail next time.
God willing.
Well, Brother George, I sure have appreciated this time with you and we are grateful to
all of our listeners who continue to support us and listen to our podcast.
If you look on Facebook or YouTube, the Florida School of Preaching, you will find links
to those things that we are putting forth.
If you have questions about anything that you hear on this podcast for George or for any
of the other guests or hosts, please write us, email us, and we'll do our very best to get
back to you as soon as possible.
We want to thank all of you that have tuned in this week.
and we're looking forward to being with you again next time here on the Harvester Podcast,
the work of the Florida School of Preaching, season three.
We'll be looking forward to starting episode number three next time.