My Witnessing

[Kenny]

Currently I am fixated on one particular person in my school. He sits next to me in French class and we get along really well together. We talk, goof off, and have an all-around good time. He knows that I am a "Jesusfreak" and I get to talk to him about every once in awhile.

Today, happened to be one of those days. He's one of those agnostics that do not believe in Christianity because he believes that it was just made up to explain things that were not explainable before now. He also advocates the fact that he has an "open mind". I have presented various questions to him in order to catch him in a contradiction or lack of logic.

However, I really would love to see this boy come to faith. His name is Jonathan and I pray that you pray for his salvation. I also ask that you may post any ideas that you may have that I can give to him in order to prove the Christian faith or to show him his mistakes. He is one of the few people who does not shut me out compeltely and we have very nice, mild conversations about it - which I enjoy tremendously; however, I would enjoy it infinately more if he would come to Jesus Christ.

Suggestions?

[rgrove]

This is wonderful. Of course I pray that God will begin His work in this young man and grant him true repentence and faith in Christ as his Lord and Savior.

Now, in regards as to how to approach him in your effort to win him to Christ. First I ask that you recognize what you can do and what you can't do. It warms my heart to hear you ask for prayer for him because the first thing we must all understand is that others do not come to faith because of the craftiness of our arguments but by the sovereign gift of grace given by our Father in heaven. Does that mean that we shouldn't prepare by studying God's Word and reading what great teachers say about methodology and the like? Certainly not! It's our duty to be well informed and seek to express ourselves in a way that honors God, but we must always understand our utter dependence upon the work of the Holy Spirit in this effort and not seek to replace the work of the Holy Spirit with our own power of persuasion. As you know from other threads I am Reformed. What I just said is a reflection of those convictions.

Next I recommend you reconsider how you are approaching him. You appear to be approaching him as though he is capable of reasoning properly on his own. So I'd like to briefly look at the state of natural man so that we can see that this is not the case. The fall has had a devastating effect upon all of man, including his ability to reason. Paul says:

Eph 4:17-18 - "Now this I say and testify in the Lord, that you must no longer walk as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds. They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart."

Sin has had a devastating effect upon mankinds ability to think. In fact Paul says the believers at Colosse were "once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds (Col 1:21)". And to the believers at Ephesus he says "And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience - among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. (Eph 2:1-3)" And to the Romans Paul says about unbelievers "For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. (Rom 1:21)"

To bring this point back to what I was saying about salvation now we need to see how Paul brings the devastating effects of sin on the unbeliever to their spiritual state. This touches both on apologetics and the God's work in the process of salvation itself.

Rom 8:5-8 "For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God."

We must have absolute faith in God for the salvation of anyone we are witnessing to because "reasoning" with them on their terms will never work. Paul tells the church at Corinth:

1 Cor 1:20-31 - "Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. 22 For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

26 For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. 27 But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; 28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, 29 so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. 30 He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus, whom God made our wisdom and our righteousness and sanctification and redemption. 31 Therefore, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”<br>
Do you see why I'm spending so much time on the natural state of man? It's vital to see him for what he is. He is "fallen and can't get up" under his own power! Well, how can we proceed if this is the case? Let's see how the apostle Paul says he did it:

1 Cor 2:1-5 - "And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. 2 For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. 3 And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, 4 and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, 5 that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God."

Did Paul not prepare? No, he obviously spent every waking moment preparing. It was his life's work. But he knew that salvation was the work of God from start to finish. He knew Christ came "so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus." (Rom 3:26b)

God gave us a powerful tool. It is his law. Paul says this:

Rom 3:19-20 - "we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin."

What law is it that Paul speaks of? I firmly believe that he is referring to the ten commandments here. Talk about them to your friend. He is not in Christ, therefore he is still "under the law" as Paul says. Breaking the law is sin. The word sin meant "to fall short" in Greek. For instance, when archers fell short of their targets in contests the watcher would yell "Sin!" because it fell short. So Paul can say "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". So have you ever discussed the things he's done? Since your friend is made in the image of God the law enables you to have a direct path to his conscience. Bring it up periodically so that he can see his guilt before a just and holy God. Now follow Paul's line of thought through Romans 1-5. See how Paul shows that we need "peace with God" (Rom 5:1) and the forgiveness of sins. This is his greatest need my friend. Show your friend Christ crucified and, most importantly, why He was crucified". In the end, this is the message that God has chosen for the salvation of souls. All of the other apologetic arguments you can use are good in that they demonstrate the reasonableness of belief in God, but the gospel of Jesus Christ and Him crucified is the message that God has ordained from all eternity to save souls. To this I recommend you turn.

How can you do this on a practical level? I recommend listening to some free resources at www.livingwaters.com for greater understanding of application.

The outstanding sermon Hell's Best Kept Secret
Then there's True and False Conversion
And a lengthier list with more free sermons is located on this page.

Above and beyond this I also recommend the Presuppositional resources I linked to in your other post on extrabiblical apologetic materials. Presuppositionalism will teach you how to go about using reason in a biblically based method to show your friend that his position does not give him the preconditions for intelligibility. He can't give you an account for why anything is true or false. He can't give an account for morality. He can't give you an account for a single aspect of life as we know it. Presuppositionalism goes beyond the classical arguments and exposes the utter, total and complete irrationality of unbelief. But as much as I like presuppositionalism, it's not ultimately what saves someone. A clear understanding of Christ and Him crucified is how God does that. So start there brother. Start there.

Yours In Christ,
Ron

[Kenny]

Thanks. I will look into this. Yes, I think I need a Witnessing 101 class again...I seem to be taking the wrong route.

[rgrove]

You're witnessing, so you're on the right route! ;D Far too many people that have been Christians longer than you've been alive have never done what you're doing. I admire you and your work, I really do. And forget 101, you're long past that. Actually, what I'm pushing you into is graduate level work!

I wish at 16 I was where you are. Instead I was doing drugs, drinking, getting into trouble, etc. I wasn't trying to be critical in my comments. Hopefully you didn't take it that way. It's just that the Lord has seen fit to work in you very young. Praise be to God, He has spared you from the kinds of lives some of us have drug ourselves through. As a result, though, you might need to be reminded periodically from scriptures of the nature of the natural man. His thinking isn't the same as Christian thinking. If you delve a little into Presuppositionalist apologetics you'll begin to see that illustrated more deeply. You've done a marvelous job of studying evidentialist apologetics, but from what I've seen here I really think you're ready to go deeper than that. Presuppositionalist apologetic is deeper and will make sure you stay scripturally grounded in your view of natural man. You'll find that you'll see a lot of presuppositionalism used by Ken Ham once you start looking at this apologetic method. His book "Evolution: The Lie" is very presuppositional. It's one of the things I like about AiG.

Keep up the good work Keeny.

Yours In Christ,
Ron

[Soulfyre]

Actually, I'm going to do the unthinkable and give some support to the evidentiary approach (although NOT in isolation). While it is true that only the Holy Spirit convicts, and God has particularly ordained the proclamation of His word as that which will not return to Him void, but will accomplish His purpose, He also commands us to be ready to give a reason for the hope that is in us. Certainly the fact that God's word best comports with reality (since God created reality) is insurmountable. The use of evidentialism is often a quick way to uncover the "real" objections a person has to believing--the objections that proceed from a will to disbelieve, rather than from a well-reasoned dispute of a factual nature. Even Francis Schaeffer would say that sometimes it is only when dangled over the fires of hell that one truly perceives their need for heaven. And sometimes the Holy Spirit will use simple things like "evidences" to attack a person's retreat into rationalism. God does not reveal to us the manner in which He speaks to the human heart. One may postulate "prevenient grace", or one may argue for the priority of regeneration to belief, but in either case, we may argue only for logical precedent, which is dangerous to presume in an attempt to describe the wooing of the heart of the created by the Infinite Eternal. We use those means at our disposal. Certainly this would include both scripture and a well-reasoned arguement, and trust in God for the outcome. We are instruments, used of God to communicate (in all senses of the word) His Truth. If we needed only quote scripture, and it were not necessary to engage both the mind and heart of the hearer, then it would make as much sense to quote I Corinthians 15:3-7 in koine Greek, for surely God would not be limited by such human vagaries as language.

God bless and keep you,

Matthew (soulfyre)

[rgrove]

I'm don't mean to say that evidentialism doesn't have it's place. I get Creation Magazine, used to get TJ Magazine, am involved in the Portland Creation Science Association, and organized Dr. Andy McIntosh's visit to our church last fall for a Creationist conference. I also have many DVD's, videos and books from groups like Answers In Genesis, the Institust for Creation Research, etc. I also own most of the major evidentialist apologetic works out there today.

So, now that my evidentialist credentials have been established , I have a deep concern that many evidentialist works do not look at the lost in a biblical manner. Also, IMO (and this is just my opinion) many evidentiary books do not seem to adequately take worldviews into consideration. Take a title like "Evidence that Demands a Verdict". To the atheist, no, it doesn't. The evidence is understood inside of their worldview where it makes sense just fine to them. Also, many just don't take into account of the depravity of man as the Bible describes it. Some do of course, but the fact is that many do not. They also don't seem to place enough emphasis on using evidences to silence objections for the sole purpose of getting back to the gospel and the sinners need for a savior. One of the reasons I like Answers In Genesis so much is that their material rarely leaves these aspect out. Very trustworthy. I also carry several of their evengelistic tracts around in my jacket pocket at all times with more in the back seat of my car. It drives my wife nuts that I leave them someplace in virtually every public place we go to.

So in the end, I'm not recommending to Kenny NOT to use evidences. By all means, use them where appropriate to establish that the Christian worldview is reasonable, but subordinate to a presuppositional framework. The antithesis between believing and ubelieving thought requires this. I'm merely recommending that he look at an apologetic system where reason itself is used in a more biblical manner (presuppositionalism) and to keep a tight focus on where he can insert the gospel in his discussions.

Now, I have a question for Kenny since he likes to look at what appear to be contradictions in the Bible The next two proverbs are the keys to the two-pronged, presuppositional approach to reasoning with unbelieving thought. What are they saying?

Prov 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself.
Prov 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes.

(hint - if you find the article in my next post you'll find the answer )

Yours In Christ,
Ron

"What we've won the unbeliever with is what we've won the unbeliever to" - I heard this was from James Montgomery Boice

[rgrove]

Here is an excellent summary of how evidences fit into the presuppositional apologetic since presuppositionalists do a far better jog of taking worldviews into account than the classicla apologetic has. It is from an article by Richard Pratt located at Monergism.com:

Misconception #7: “Van Til rejected the use of rational arguments and empirical evidences to support the claims of Christ. He simply told unbelievers that they must believe.”

On the contrary, Van Til affirmed that apologists should use every available rational argument and empirical evidence to present a convincing case for Christian theism. Traditional theistic proofs, archaeological evidences, and the like are part of the arsenal for believers engaged with the world of unbelief. They are tools that the Spirit uses to bring men and women to saving faith.

Van Til did not, however, emphasize the use of particular rational and empirical resources. He was more concerned with alerting his readers to the basic outlooks people use to evaluate such evidences. Van Til believed that every fact of the universe confirms the truth of Scripture. How could it be otherwise? Nonetheless, appealing to particular facts or arguments to defend the faith often proves vain because unbelievers have alternative explanations that rise out of their basic world views.

For instance, the empty tomb does not prove that Jesus is the Son of God, unless we adopt a fuller Christian outlook on the world. Perhaps his body was stolen; maybe Jesus was a freak accident in a chance universe, the only mere man to come back to life. Likewise, the principle of cause and effect does not prove the existence of God, unless we operate with a host of other Christian ideas. Many leading physicists today simply respond that the universe is infinite and eternal; perhaps there is an infinite series of physical causes, or a multiplicity of gods and demons that formed the universe as we know it.

Van Til affirmed that in reality most traditional arguments used in support of Christian theism are absolutely conclusive; they objectively demonstrate the truth of Christianity. But unless the Spirit is at work, unbelievers will dispute their decisiveness because they operate out of a false world and life view that keeps them from drawing the proper conclusions. When this occurs, Christian apologists must be ready to address the deeper issues that mislead unbelievers, especially their commitment to human autonomy. Van Til believed that these more basic commitments were neglected in other apologetic methods. So he stressed dealing with presuppositions over particular arguments and evidences.

[mpethe]

Suggestions?

I once heard a quote something to this effect:

"the apologetic for the 21st century is love"

truly love God with all your heart and other people as yourself and people will take notice. people need to see radical love and self sacrifice lived out for the glory of God.

"In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven." Matt 5:16

live as if you really believe that God is all there is worth living for - that this world is not our home - that God will work everything for our good - that we can love our enemies and endure trials with joy and hope... etc.

easier said that done, but I believe it to be true.

[Kenny]

rgrove said:

You're witnessing, so you're on the right route! ;D Far too many people that have been Christians longer than you've been alive have never done what you're doing. I admire you and your work, I really do. And forget 101, you're long past that. Actually, what I'm pushing you into is graduate level work!

I wish at 16 I was where you are. Instead I was doing drugs, drinking, getting into trouble, etc. I wasn't trying to be critical in my comments. Hopefully you didn't take it that way. It's just that the Lord has seen fit to work in you very young. Praise be to God, He has spared you from the kinds of lives some of us have drug ourselves through. As a result, though, you might need to be reminded periodically from scriptures of the nature of the natural man. His thinking isn't the same as Christian thinking. If you delve a little into Presuppositionalist apologetics you'll begin to see that illustrated more deeply. You've done a marvelous job of studying evidentialist apologetics, but from what I've seen here I really think you're ready to go deeper than that. Presuppositionalist apologetic is deeper and will make sure you stay scripturally grounded in your view of natural man. You'll find that you'll see a lot of presuppositionalism used by Ken Ham once you start looking at this apologetic method. His book "Evolution: The Lie" is very presuppositional. It's one of the things I like about AiG.

Keep up the good work Keeny.

Yours In Christ,
Ron

Thanks. I have read Evolution: The Lie and Answers in Genesis by Ken Ham. However, I read stuff one time, and miss a lot of good stuff that I find the second time. When I get out of school I might be able to read something I want to read. My english teach insists on us reading at least two books at once...in additon with grammar and literature stories out of our plain ol' lit book. lol

I was attempting to read Jesus Among Other Gods by Ravi Zacharias and I need to start reading the Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell. lol Just don't have time!

[TianMing]

Firstly, he's obviously a good guy because he takes french . But on a serious note, get him to a site like this one where he can ask all the questions he likes, he can read testimonies, find out general information. He can educate himself and learn about the religion and ultimately get to know Jesus Christ.

[Kenny]

TianMing said:

Firstly, he's obviously a good guy because he takes french . But on a serious note, get him to a site like this one where he can ask all the questions he likes, he can read testimonies, find out general information. He can educate himself and learn about the religion and ultimately get to know Jesus Christ.

Already invited him to my site. Just hasn't go around to it.