Like Button

Wednesday, July 10, 2013

The Deistic Apologist

You all know what a deist is, right? As opposed to a theist? Both believe in God. Both, in fact, are considered monotheists -- only one God. Both ascribe power to God. They even both agree that God is the Creator. The difference between a theist and a deist is that a deist believes that God has, well, withdrawn. He set everything in motion and now just lets it run on its own. Oh, maybe He intervenes from time to time, but that would be a liberal deist. No, for the most part, a deist would argue that God started it all and is now basically out of the picture. A theist would argue that God started it all and continues to sustain it all. Indeed, a biblical theist would argue that all things consist in God (Col 1:17).

Now, of course, any biblical Christian would classify him or herself as a theist. Deism as an actually argued viewpoint has pretty much died out. The truth, however, is that all of us tend toward deism at times. Maybe it's on the topic of "Free Will". God indeed is hands off on our choices ... right? Well, that's deism. Others are offended at the suggestion that a hurricane or a tornado is an "act of God". These things just happen! Right? And even if we agree that they are ultimately in God's control, surely we wouldn't argue that He actually had His hand, for instance, on that one that hit, say, Moore, Oklahoma, would we? Oh, and certainly God doesn't actually bring anyone to Himself, does He? I mean, we come of our own accord, right? He may call, but we do the responding. You see? Most of us at some point argue for a deistic perspective.

One of the most common deists is the Apologist. Certainly not all, but there is a reasonably large number who believe that God mostly takes a hands-off approach when it comes to defending the faith. "I mean, sure, He might be helpful when defending the faith among believers, but, look, you know that it's only good arguments, sound logic, and clear evidence that will persuade an unbeliever, right? And, look, I don't know what playbook you're reading, but never, never use the Bible in defense of the faith with unbelievers, okay? I mean, that is just obvious, isn't it? They don't accept it as valid truth, so why use it? No, no, if we are to be good Apologists to unbelievers, we need to have a solid grasp on science and empirical data and irrefutable philosophical reasoning. Because God and His Word have no sway in the unbeliever's thinking or heart." And that, dear reader, is genuine deistic apologetics.

I would humbly suggest that the Bible disagrees. The Bible says that it's God's kindness that leads to repentance (Rom 2:4). Paul (one of the original Apologists) argued that "faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ" (Rom 10:17). Paul understood that "the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing", but he went on to say, "But to us who are being saved it is the power of God" (1 Cor 1:18). The Word of the Cross is the power of God. Indeed, Jesus assured us that the primary issue of whether or not people will believe is not whether or not the argument was coherent and secular, but whether or not faith is granted by the Father (John 6:64-65). Jesus (you know, the "Christ" of Christianity) claimed that the single impediment to believing in Him was not failed arguments, but not being of His flock (John 10:26).

What is my point? My point is not that coherent arguments are of no value. My point is not that we shouldn't have good evidence and reason from worldly thinking. I mean, we know from Scripture that the heavens declare the glory of God (Psa 19:1), that God has made Himself known "in the things that have been made" (Rom 1:20). And we certainly have biblical examples of Christian Apologists using reasoning and evidence. My point is not that these are of no value. My point is that these are only tools. And my point is that we are not left to these tools alone. God is not stuck with our best reasoning skills. Many of us may think in a deistic fashion about some things. "God has left this up to us." But God is not a deist. He is intimately involved. He has given us His Spirit (1 John 4:13). He has ordered us to be transformed by the renewing of our minds (Rom 12:2). He has provided His Word (2 Tim 3:16-17). And He remains Sovereign ... even in salvation. He has left us tools, but He is the Power and, in the end, we are His tools to accomplish His work. When we succumb to deistic thinking on defending the faith, we've already lost the battle (Rom 8:7-8; Eph 2:1; 1 Cor 2:14). And that's a shame since "the victory belongs to the Lord" (Prov 21:31). Don't be a loser. And don't be a deist. Especially when defending the faith to unbelievers. There is no more important place to believe that God is at work than in the salvation of men.

4 comments:

David said...

How Apologists have changed. When I think Apologist, I think "Defender of the Faith". And seeing as our faith is in Christ and God as revealed in the Bible, not as they are revealed in nature or philosophy, you'd think the Bible would be paramount to an Apologist. I understand the sentiment they put forth, but when you are defending the faith without using the source document it seems kind of hollow. The power is in the Word, not the world.

Stan said...

Yes, the power is in the Word. That's why it seems so odd that Defenders of the Faith would heartily recommend that we don't use the primary documentation of the Faith because they don't think it will have any effect.

David said...

Well, it may not have the effect they desire, but I seem to recall something about "My Word will not return void" or something like it.

Stan said...

That's the deism I'm talking about. They believe that the only means to get "the effect they desire" is by their efforts and their reasoning skills. It comes, I believe, from this subtle deism and a misunderstanding of the basic nature of fallen Man.