Before we get into anything understand that i am speaking mainly about the intellectual domain in this article, the spiritual aspect will be in a different write-up.
A
biblicalworld view This entails not only mere faith in spiritual matters but provides a view of the
world starting from the initial position of the Bible to every dimension of human
existence. All “ideas, principles and metaphysical claims“ are interdependent and in
harmony with the biblical account.
Francis J. Backwith puts it this way,
“These beliefs
are not mere utterances of private religious devotion but are propositions whose
proponents claim accurately instruct us on the nature of the universe, human persons, our
relationship with God, human communities and the moral life.” Such an understanding
of the world that is based on the scripture called Bible forms the term biblical world view."
And i would add human history as well.
apologetics aims at achieving
biblical spirituality and will find its expression in two ways: the intellectual-informative
discourse combined with the applicative-formative (educational) feature of apologetic,
both of which are integrated within the very concept of biblical Spirituality.
John 4:23
"Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”
Before getting into apologetics let's look at the result of failing to apply them properly.
Lack of Preparation Why do people fall from the faith? And why do so many students enter college as Christian yet exit as secularist? There are plenty of studies showing this exact scenario happening. Christian student enters a secular college and leaves a secularist.
The answer is very simple, lack of knowledge. They are unaware. If you go to battle unprepared you lose, in this case your faith.
The lack of intellectual equipping of Christians is a blind spot.
It is akin to sending a soldier to battle with no training or weapon, then he gets surrounded from every angle and surrenders, afterwards the people that were in charge of training him get mad at the enemy soldiers.
You might think having this sort of mini school before school is too radical or over bearing, but understand it is necessary. By default we are majority of the time intellectually (and spiritually) engaged in battle the moment we enroll into these institutions, we don't have a choice in the matter.
Without this prep the student may actually begin to believe the arguments against your beliefs if you are not intellectually prepared. These professors can speak with authority and be very persuasive, especially to the intellectually neglecting christian. Once you understand the hollowness and lack of substance behind these arguments you will not be convinced in the slightest.
The best thing would be to formulate a standardized and comprehensive program that can be easily distributed and used in churches, as that is where the highest amount of pre college Christian students will be.
Philosophy became scienceThey began to separate in the 19th century, when the term science was coined, and over the course of the 19th century, it replaced “natural philosopher.” The two had begun to branch out earlier than that with the development of the hypothetico-deductive model, which locks science into a particular epistemology, beginning with Galileo and really becoming formalized by Descartes in 1637.
Philosophically speaking Christianity is far more rational and logical compared to any competition. This is an easy area to dominate and has been that way as far back as we can go.
The issue is that philosophical arguments while still essential and critical to apologetics do not have the same impact they once had. The weight of the philosophical claim is less nowadays.
This quote by Stephen Hawking sums it up well : "How can we understand the world in which we find ourselves? How does the universe behave? What is the nature of reality? Where did all this come from? Did the universe need a creator? Most of us do not spend most of our time worrying about these questions, but almost all of us worry about them some of the time.
Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead. Philosophy has not kept up with modern developments in science, particularly physics. Scientists have become the bearers of the torch of discovery in our quest for knowledge."
Now the grand issue isn't the philosophers or scientist themselves per se or the fields, the issue is where the general public and global population places their trust and derives their world views. This used to be philosophy, nowadays it is science. Philosophy can touch the immaterial, science can not.
The Paradigm ShiftNow you might think this is a completely awful situation, but that is where your wrong. Very recently have things began to change.
This separation really began in the 1870s with mainstream acceptance of evolutionary theory. This was the beginning of a unintended combination, a naturalistic model of origins and the separation of science and philosophy.
From 1870-1953 science was very much against us and philosophy was making an exit.
It was a time were we knew just enough to think we know, without realizing how much we don't know. Let's call this period the "false renaissance".
Thankfully science has progressed so much in the 21st century that the very study of the material world is what's killing materialism.
If we look at the trend line of scientific discovery starting with the discovery of DNA in 1953 you will notice that virtually every major breakthrough supports theism. Apologist need to be aware of this and use this as much as they can, this is probably the most powerful tool in the apologist toolbox. The paradigm is shifting within the sciences.
If you show that the very thing people place their trust in to formulate their worldviews points to God then what now? If they continue to resist it is a issue of the heart, but at least we know we showed them the evidence.
The Discovery Institute does a great job at recognizing this, executing, and understanding that 21st century apologetics is a team aspect with specialist in their respective field and area. A master of one is better than a jack of all trades in apologetics.
So whats taking so long?Science has only very recently advanced to a point where it is no longer tenable that we have come about by chance. This is only the beginning of the pendelum swinging. It will take awhile for the older professors and scientist to change their minds, they may never since they were born during the false Ren period and may simply be set in their ways.
This is why should focus on the youth and pre-college students. This is really the optimal way if you want to change academia at the heart in 50 years or so.
But make no mistake, the data is continually piling up, either positive for design or negative for evolution. It will eventually come to a point where they can no longer sweep it under the rug.
This is a great century for faith and science to compliment each other.
The general public is always 15 years or so behind modern science, you really have to commit a lot of time and research to not only understand implications but also keep up with the latest in science.
The internet has helped this issue but it is really just pop sci content talking about mythology such as the "multiverse", so meh.
So what system of apologetics should we employ?Considering the information above it is important to recognize is that the evidentialist arguments for God have gotten so strong nowadays, no longer is it on the side of evolution. It's not as it was in 1950 where we thought life was a rupe goldberg that came about by chance.
The trend line of scientific discovery is in large support of theism, we will have the inverse this century of what happened during the 19th century.
Long story short, evidentialism is what will have the most impact on the population and what should be emphasized.
Be aware though i'm not saying only evidentialism. Classical apologetics and so on are still extremely crucial.
Aren't people already doing this?In progress...
https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1076&context=theses
