|
|
"Hey, Rachel, two Christians stopped me in the cafeteria
the other day," said my Muslim friend. I came sharply to
attention. "They tried to convert me, but they were basing
everything they said on the Bible. I just don't accept the Bible,
at least not completely."
This friend knew about my beliefs as a Christian and we were just
getting comfortable enough in our relationship to bring up our
differences. But I knew then I would soon be facing her intellectual
objections to my faith.
Some time passed, and we continued to get to know each other.
One day I asked her, "Why do you accept Mohammed's account
about Jesus, from the seventh century, and not the eyewitness
reports from the first century?"
"Well, I guess there aren't enough witnesses," she responded.
"And not enough challenges to those witnesses. And even if
there were, there's no way to be sure, no way to test it. If only
there were a snapshot of Jesus exploding out of the tomb!"
Certainly a weak argument if we would apply the same criteria
to her beliefs, I thought, but it turned out to be effective
enough to keep her from Christ.
In classes, cafeterias, hallways and libraries, we are surrounded
by skeptics. Many may not want that title, but anyone who is a
consistent Bahaist, Muslim, Jehovah's Witness, New Ager, agnostic
or outright atheist -- is skeptical towards the biblical records.
They may speak up in classes or come into our fellowships with
questions that stump us. Some are confident professors who challenge
us. Many are our close friends. And their questions may be honest,
unfair, witty, silly or searching -- in any combination. What
can a Christian leader do to prepare others to give a gracious,
well-reasoned defense?
First, help chapter members recognize that skepticism comes
in many forms. Questions may be purely intellectual, or they
may hinge on a hidden moral problem. My Muslim friend was not
involved in immorality. Her doubts were tied to another religious
system. Still others have doubts that spring from troubling situations
-- the death of a loved one or a dysfunctional home where trusting
is dangerous.
These reasons may combine to keep someone in a deadlock of doubt.
One former skeptic, a student named Kevin, told me, "My personal
agony as a doubter was in bouncing from intellectual questions
to reactions to family pain and back again. I couldn't get a strong
enough foothold to propel me into a stable belief about God."
Not all skeptics are so honest. Jesus' response to the Pharisees
and Sadducees in Matthew 16:4 was, "'A wicked and adulterous
generation looks for a miraculous sign, but none will be given
it except the sign of Jonah.'  Jesus then left them and went away."
He did provide one clue (Jonah spent three days in the belly of
the fish, just as Jesus would be in the tomb for three days and
then come forth), but he spent little time entertaining their
intellectual dishonesty. In contrast, he discerned that Nicodemus
needed a softer but still direct approach (see John 3:1-21). And
with Saul of Tarsus (later Paul the Apostle), what looked like
pure antagonism toward Christians was really misdirected, honest
zeal for God (Acts 9).
For many skeptical seekers, an honest search is mixed with a not-so-fair
reaction to Christianity as it's often portrayed on TV. Fellow
students rarely understand our faith, and almost certainly will
not have investigated the person of Jesus. Even as confident believers,
our human inclination is to get defensive when we face opposition.
Instead, we must try to understand where a person is coming from
and weed out false assumptions.
Second, turn a threat into a learning experience. When
you hear that Christian students are threatened by skeptics, take
the opportunity to provide ways to strengthen their faith through
apologetics, a fancy word for learning how to defend what
we believe and show that it is reasonable. This can have far reaching
results as we send well-equipped members back into classrooms
and dorms.
Third, help your chapter members learn to communicate clearly
and intelligently while still being warm and relational. We
live in a relational generation, and few people come to Jesus
by logic and argument alone.
GREAT
LEAP OR SMALL HOP?
With some people, the greatest mistake we can make is to tell
them to accept Christ by faith. Why? Because they have a different
definition for faith. To the doubter, accepting something by faith
means blind trust and intellectual suicide. That's exactly what
many of them think Christians have bought into -- brain death.
One agnostic I was talking with stated, "Christians totally
ignore the foundations of science. They take us back three hundred
years." Many believe we have taken a great leap off a steep
cliff and have never recovered from the impact. And now we are
trying to push them off the same precipice. Frankly, they can't
make the jump. My friend Kevin confirms this feeling. "I
needed to deal with my doubts squarely before I could move forward
spiritually," he told me. "If Christianity were not
intellectually sound, it would be impossible for me to accept
it. In my search, I simply could not ignore my mind."
You can agree with this kind of honest doubt. A blind leap could
make someone a New Ager or a Mormon or a Hindu. There's nothing
spiritual about an ignorant leap in the dark. We're asking people
to place their confidence in historical evidence and to follow
a person who is proven and trustworthy.
Jesus scolded the disciples for their lack of faith because they
had already seen him calm the sea and feed the multitudes. The
Christian God is a God of clear promise and evidence. He furnished
meticulous detail to identify the Messiah -- credentials, so we
wouldn't miss him. We need to see the Bible for what it is: an
unfolding documentation of God's activity in historical events
and humanity's response to them. Helping chapter members recognize
this is a great asset to evangelism.
INCONSISTENT? WHO, ME?
Skeptics usually have examples of supposed inconsistencies in
Christianity. In a practical logic course I took, the textbook
pointed out the 'fallacy of circular reasoning,' using the example
of quoting the Bible in order to prove the Bible. This accusation
of circular reasoning is, in reality, a 'straw man' fallacy (a
misrepresentation of your position created in order to put it
down). The Bible is not one book, but rather a library of many
sources all confirming one another. Again, few people realize
this.
My textbook also attacked the 'false dilemma' of Jesus being a
lunatic, liar, or Lord. After all, the authors concluded, he could
have been simply a good teacher. But they missed the real point:
a merely good teacher (particularly in the Jewish context) would
never say, "I am the way, the truth and the life"
(John 14:6). "A man who was merely a man and said the sort
of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would
either be a lunatic . . . or else he would be the Devil of Hell,"
wrote C. S. Lewis in Mere Christianity. ". . . Let us
not come with any patronizing nonsense about
his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to
us. He did not intend to."
My textbook aside, I soon discovered the instructor had a few
inconsistencies of his own. No matter what evidence I brought
up to defend Christianity, he would not accept it. (By the way,
I had learned in his very class that his reaction would be considered
a 'self-sealing fallacy.' His criteria for "enough evidence"
always shifted to exclude whatever I happened to present.)
Naturally, it's wise to be careful when pointing out inconsistencies,
especially to a professor. But for a truly honest skeptic, it
may be a breakthrough. Be fair about the church's defects. Don't
defend injustices done with Medieval zeal (the Crusades) or in
the panic of paranoia (witch hunts). We don't need to answer for
all the problems in the church. The unbeliever is right when he
or she sees problems there. When we are fair about these issues,
we will gain their confidence. After all, we're not calling people
to a faulty human philosophy but to a relationship with God and
his people.
My logic professor stubbornly resisted good reasons for following
Jesus, but my encounter with my history instructor was a little
different. When he attacked the scribes as lazy and inaccurate
in recording the Old Testament, I knew I could not let it pass.
After class, I approached him and brought up the scribes' meticulous
habits, and the fact that over a thousand-year span, the few copyists'
errors there were did not change the meaning of the text. I explained
that I didn't mind an honest criticism towards the Bible, but
we should give credit to evidence.
When he agreed with me that the biblical records are among the
most accurate, I felt a real breakthrough. But then he added that
"it's always safer to be hypercritical. Not just towards
to Bible, but towards any philosophy." This sounded fair
on the surface, like equal treatment. But in actuality, he had
conveniently left one viewpoint immune -- his own. Shades of my
logic professor!
Taking a deep breath, I said, "Okay, if we need to be hypercritical
towards every philosophy, I suppose you need to apply that to
what you just said. But then you nullify your own position, don't
you?" He was nearly struck dumb. He thought for a moment,
then said, "Well, that's a new twist."
Hypercriticism substituted for honest criticism leaves nothing
standing, not even the little plot of its own space it seeks to
occupy. Of course the Bible cannot hold up to utter denial. But
honest, searching criticism doesn't cast it into doubt at all.
The Scriptures remain an outstanding example of hard-core evidence
any lawyer would envy.
My friend Kevin had to face this issue of hypercriticism. He says,
"I discovered my own doubts were based in an unfair approach
to the Bible which I had unknowingly picked up from my professors."
Such teaching is now epidemic on college campuses. It's such a
part of the air we breath that my history instructor was badly
shaken by my point. He actually thought he was being neutral.
It's both a bane and a blessing that the honest skeptic hates
inconsistencies. Often, these are his or her main objections to
Christianity. Sometimes Christians have offered poor and
weak defenses. But then so have those who doubt. We are in a position
to introduce a clear-headed, fair, documented gospel. And it may
appeal to those who are really searching for truth.
THE HEART OF THE MATTER
When we love our doubting friends, we find ways to avoid offense
(except when the gospel is invasive by its very nature, cutting
to the heart). And we are willing to take insults. Proverbs 12:16
says, "Fools show their anger at once, but the prudent ignore
an insult." Paul writes, "Let your gentleness be known
to everyone. The Lord is near" (Philippians 4:5). Even boisterous,
in-your-face, I've-got-the-answer Peter says, "But in your
hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an
answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope
that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect" (1
Peter 3:15-16, NIV). The Bible doesn't say to avoid confrontation.
Jesus didn't. Paul and Peter didn't. But when you need to confront,
when you give well-reasoned answers, do it in such a way that
those around you can handle it. Know your audience the way Paul
knew his (see Acts 17:16-34 for an example).
An honest question can keep people from Christ, but an intellectually
correct answer will not necessarily usher them into the kingdom
of God. Addressing the intellect can open the mind, but kindness
opens the heart. Make bold statements with humility. Jesus Christ
can meet us on both the intellectual and emotional levels. Christianity
is well-rounded. Jesus is Life! When we live with joy among those
who reject Jesus, their defenses start to deteriorate.
Yet, there are times your audience will hate you. After all, Jesus
was killed for speaking the truth. He was warm. He presented competent
answers. But some people still rejected him. If you end up in
a heated argument with a skeptic, examine the situation afterward.
Were you warm? Did you offer competent answers? Were you fair?
Did you address assumptions first?
If you tried to keep the relationship open and attempted to speak
the truth in love, take comfort in Peter's words, "But even
if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. Do not
fear what they fear, do not be frightened" (1 Peter 3:14).
Jesus said, "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute
you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me"
(Matthew 5:11). As leaders, we may have to help sort through frustrations
and hurts after our group members have had a trying interaction.
IT SAYS WHAT?
Three areas should concern us before we face the skeptic. First,
we need to know facts about the Bible and its historical context.
Second, we need a knowledge of what the Bible says. Third, we
should know our particular audience's misconceptions.
If we learned our "Bible facts" early in Sunday school,
we may not realize the general ignorance which faces us as we
approach people from different backgrounds. The Almanac of
the Christian World reports that only 42 percent of Americans
know that it was Jesus who delivered the Sermon on the Mount.
Only 46 percent could name all four Gospels. If the public is
ignorant about these basic facts, we can be sure they are uninformed
about the intricate checks and balances found in the sixty-six
books which make up the Scriptures.
When was the Bible written? How was it recorded? How does the
Old Testament prepare the human race for the Messiah, and does
Jesus of Nazareth fit the description? Does the New Age portrait
of Jesus match the biblical records? How many witnesses testify
to the life of Jesus? These are all good questions that are worth
knowing how to respond to. (A good way to start getting a handle
on these questions is simply to read through the Bible on a regular
basis.)
A working knowledge of alleged contradictions in the Bible can
also help. Books such as Gleason Archer's Encyclopedia of Bible
Difficulties or IVP®'s Hard Sayings series will
strengthen our own faith and provide examples for us to share
when people question the Bible's accuracy.
ROOM TO THINK AND CHOOSE
Skeptics of every stripe need room to think and choose. God respects
that. One characteristic of a post-Christian society is a reaction
to a church which seems to have overstepped its boundaries in
the past. Our job is to bring people close to the gospel. We are
not in charge; God is. We share our humble humanity with every
person, and that can be winsome. They don't answer to us. We are
fellow seekers who have come upon something to be shared.
I remembered this while talking with my history professor. He
was saying, "Many biblical scholars refute that the Bible
is historically accurate."
"And yet many others support it," I ventured carefully.
"I needed to look at both sides myself. I had to,
for my own peace of mind. I was shocked, really astounded, at
what I found." He heard me, and suddenly we were on the same
ground as fellow seekers. I knew then that he would do some digging
on his own. He wasn't convinced, but we parted as friends.
My logic professor may have thought, somewhat justly, that I had
been trying to trap him. In a sense, I was. But I've also been
learning to allow people room to search and discover the truth
in God's timing. Deciding what to say and how to say it isn't
always easy, but it's a joy to see people open up, to watch them
discover that losing their lives to Christ means becoming free
-- free to think, free to abandon inconsistencies, free to be
loved, free to allow the truth of God's Word to change them.
After all, searching for truth is asking for Jesus.
|
