I watched a movie a few months back titled The Reliant. The story was set in a fictional time of rioting and unrest in America. A small town family gets caught up in it. The father (Kevin Sorbo) is killed and the kids (from young adult to maybe 8) flee to the forest to hide. The movie is about faith. "The Reliant" refers to the question, "Can we rely on God?" And the characters ask some really meaningful questions with some really meaningful answers. For example, after a death, the oldest son is angry at God and dueling with his sister over it. "Would Dad have let her die?" "No, of course not." "Why?" "Because he loved her." "So, Dad loved her better than God did?!" Those kinds of tough questions. Watching the movie, I was testing my own responses to the questions. What would I answer? How could I say? And I wondered, "What responses would others give?"
We are commanded to always be "prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you." (1 Peter 3:15) We understand that to mean to be ready to defend the faith. And, sure, that's in there. That's actually what Jude says. We are "to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints." (Jude 1:3) But Peter's version goes a little broader. It's not just about "the faith." It's about the hope we have. And, surely, the faith is a major portion of our hope. But the people asking the hard questions in that movie were believers, not skeptics. How are we at having answers for them?
Skeptics are everywhere. No surprise. Not even a complaint. And while we are supposed to contend for the faith and be ready to make a defense for the hope we have, my concern is for the people that should have the answers. Believers. Those with the Spirit and with God's Word. How do we answer life's tough questions? Hopefully not with platitudes and misguided false claims. We need to be ready to make a defense for unbelievers and for believers. Are you ready?
8 comments:
Very thought provoking! I wonder if one wouldn't approach the problem the same way as with a non-believer.
Also, do you think there is any difference between defending the faith against a questioning believer or someone who claims belief but is "progressive"?
I use different approaches for different people based on their starting point. Arguing, for instance, "Scripture says" with someone like a progressive "believer" that doesn't accept Scripture won't be any more persuasive than "Fox News says." But, then, we're not talking here about the gospel; we're talking about giving reasons to believe.
The similarity I see is in what I believe is proof that the progressive doesn't truly believe in the first place. There's a question I've asked of Dan, for instance...one of many for which an answer has never been attempted, much less given...is how far can one stray from Biblical teaching before one is worshiping a false god? If one has strayed that far, as I believe progressives like Dan clearly have, then it's like speaking to either a non-believer or a believer who no longer believes or is questioning as those in the film you describe. I agree a different approach may be in order, but the problem is the same to my way of thinking. (unless I've strayed to far :))
I agree about the "progressive Christian" who shows no interest in God's Word as a viable source for being a Christian. It's not only not Christian; it's not rational. "I only believe what Jesus said ... who said that God's word is truth ... which I can only know from the Bible ... which I reject as a valid source." The primary difference between the two forms of "defense" is one is needed to persuade toward a new view (a new life) while the other is aimed at aiding a believer to see the truth.
I think that we should all have enough familiarity with at least some of the arguments to be able to start a conversation with someone who's sincerely interested. I think we too often jump too far ahead in the conversation because people don't want to do the work of laying a proper foundation. I think this happens with non believers who want to get questions answered, but won't spend the time listening to the background information first. With progressive christians, (or LDS, JW or the like), the biggest problem comes with defining terms. JW will talk about Jesus, but they have a completely different view of who Jesus is than we see in scripture. It can get frustrating, but trying to get christians to define some basic terms can be incredibly difficult.
Absolutely, Craig. The ones I was aiming at this time, however, was being ready to answer the sincere concerns and questions of believers facing struggles and difficulties. Do we have answers for the believer that asks, "Is God disappointed with me?" (beyond merely, "No, don't worry about it."). Do we have answers for why people die "before their time" or how God can be a just God when "bad things happen to good people"? Their questions are different than the unbeliever. We need to consider both.
Two responses.
1. There are good answers for those questions.
2. We need to make sure we are familiar enough with them to be ready when asked.
Precisely. I guess I'm just asking my fellow believers to think about it, to think it through, to "be prepared."
Post a Comment