Nothing New Under the Sun

Our culture today realizes that each age brings its own set of presuppositions and has its own errors. One irony of our age of course is how we see ourselves as so uniquely different from other times.

The reality is there is nothing new under the sun as scripture teaches. Relativism is not new and contextual thinking is not new. We are only different from other ages by our degree of struggle with certain issues.

We are worse on some issues than other ages and better on others. The human condition is constant. All men are born in sin and born into cultures which promote errors.

Ultimately history repeats itself because the most essential element of man. His fallen nature and estrangement and enmity with God is always unchanged.

The expression of depravity in each age shifts a bit this way or that but it is always the same. The age we are in today is never as unique as we think.

Technology and many societal structures have changed, but each man is born with the same dark heart. The central question that each man should desire to answer in each age is how to solve his enmity to God.

The answer in every age is faith in Jesus. Before Jesus' incarnation on earth it was a looking forward and trusting in the promises of God in the future. The trust was in the promise of God that he would send a Messiah. Now we look back to the Messiah.

Many people scoff that the faith is the same. The expected Messiah and the Messiah who came seem somewhat different from what much of Israel was expecting. Of course the reality is that it is the faith which is credited as righteousness.

We always see through a glass dimly. Scripture states this plainly and the fogginess with which those of faith at times see is no argument against the nature of faith.

Theses on Apologetics

1. Aim of apologetics is often too large. Apologetics has not enough power to accomplish large scale goals. Aiming for smaller target goals is better.

2. Apologetics should not necessitate bad theology. Some movements of argumentation create necessary errors which are anti-biblical. An example is Alvin Plantinga's free will defense which is incompatible with mankind being perfected and being sinless in heaven as scripture teaches.

3. Usually winning an argument only gets you labeled as a "good arguer" and you probably won't get assent on your point.

4. Most objections are moral and not rational. Clearing a rational objection does not change belief.

5. Ideas must be appealing. People usually believe what they want. This is the great issue with apologetics. We need to persuade people they should desire a relationship with God which is hard to do via argumentation.

6. Everyone has presuppositions. If you do not think you have presuppositions you are wrong. All belief systems need a starting point. Descartes' baseless belief system is a failure. Without presuppositions rational thought is impossible although many people are unaware of the assumptions.

7. Look for the presuppositions in a position. Any argument can be rejected if you deny the presuppositions. Often good arguments have the issue of bad presuppositions.

Theology and Philosophy and Science

An interesting development in the modern world is the concept that a person cannot rationally assume some beliefs as a foundation for thought.

Philosophy and Science are often attacking religion as having contents outside of science. There are unverifiable elements of religion which cannot be scientifically tested.

The great irony is that all thought needs feed points. You cannot begin with a blank slate and think. We must posit some assumptions and begin to work from them.

Actually there is a great deal of modern philosophy which makes exactly the point that there a presuppositions (things which are assumed beforehand) for all thought. A typical argument form is:

1. List of presuppositions 2. Argument 3. Conclusion

Actually to reject many arguments you may simply reject the assumptions going into them.

For the worldview that is typically stated like this: "All belief must be verified by science." There is an unstated presupposition that all belief systems need all contents to be verified by science.

This presupposition is the error in the system as it is: 1. impossible 2. makes the system incoherent because it cannot be verified by the scientific system.