The PuritanBoard - View Single Post

JohnV · #15 (**permalink**) 07-19-2005, 05:00 PM

If I may, I think I can help to understand Schaeffer a bit more. This is how I understand him. The proof, as I believe, is not in whether skeptics are confounded, but whether it conforms to truth. I have used air-tight arguments, even on Christians, and they don't even know what hit them. What works is speaking to a person in a manner that the Holy Spirit is using to open that person's heart. And than may not always be good arguments, but just arguments that convey the majesty or holiness of God in comparison to whatever arguments (read: excuses) the person may be harbouring. Schaeffer's work is quite a different context than modern discussions.

Knowing why the arguments or excuses a person holds to are not truthfull is, I think, quite necessary. You can't just put up presupposition against presupposition, because that misrepresents the confrontation: it is always the truth against the lie. But we have to be very ready also for those reasons which we know will cut us to the heart, because they hit close to home, and are right. Such arguments don't diminish the apologetic for the Christian faith, but they do show us how we ourselves have been the cause of a lot of skepticism. Or, as Scripture puts it, Christ's name is blasphemed on our account. So I don't mind being ripped up, because that doesn't stand in the way at all of defending the faith; in fact it helps. Knowing the arguments or excuses also requires a readiness to confess, even before unbelievers, so that the true faith remains unscathed by our meagre efforts to convey holy truth from our own sinful selves, allowing the Holy Spirit to do His work.

Testing a methodology, as I believe, is futile. It is artificial, and that is already a non-apologetic. One isn't doing apologetics unless he is speaking to the person's or people's questions, reasons, excuses, or cop-outs. And he isn't doing apologetics unless he is doing the Spirit's work, not his own. Sure, he is doing apologetics, but all he is defending are his own views, not truth itself. The apologist has to remember that there is a line in the sand between truth and error, and that he himself is on the side of the unbeliever when it comes to many unanswered questions. It is the Spirit that takes us both to the other side of the line. As soon as we show pride that we are here, and the unbeliever is there, then we've lost the aid of the Spirit, for He does not abide pride in the presentation of His Word of truth.

I know that those who grew up after the Sixties will miss a lot of what Schaeffer was saying, as there is quite a bit of emphasis on answering those kinds of questions. We don't have the same kind of generation that sought answers as that generation was. You could put together almost any mixture of young people, from anywhere at all, no matter how little they had in common, put them in a room, and they would soon begin discussing the problems, doubts, the ought-to-be's of life, morality, and social structures. It was a given in almost any group setting. That is so alien to today's youth. As soon as you mention morals or religion, the first thing that pops into people's heads is a claim to unique truth and how arrogant that is, how intolerant. And I am surprised by how many of our Christian young people are of the same mind-set.

The answers that Schaeffer gives are still just as relevant, but they need to be reformulated for this generation, a generation less willing to form a group discussion than the generation in which his books were written. The idea of knowing, not just presupposing, but knowing with certainty the truth of God's Word is sometimes not even acceptable to Christians. Nobody can know, they think; all you can do is form your own beliefs from what Scripture says. And so Schaeffer's books are not going to be read with the same appreciation as the former generation. Schaeffer's motive was that, not only does the Scripture convey truth, but what it teaches shows itself to be true in every day living; and it has solid answers for those who are seeking them. But mostly, it opens up a real and personal relationship between the person and God. We share finitude with creation, but we share personhood with God. The answers are found in believing, trusting, and living in faith to the One who presents Himself to you in daily life as you face life's challenges. It is He that gives certainty to those answers.

So those answers are very real and concrete. And they can be conveyed to others. But people will always have a pocketful of excuses, reasons, and experiences to refute them. But that does not mean that those answers aren't true and concrete. It just means that the pearls they've been given are trodden under foot. Answers that take effort, commitment, and submission are nothing but foolishness to those who wouldn't care to take the effort or offer the commitment and submission required for the true answers. They often think that if it isn't simple, then it isn't true. But wisdom doesn't come like that. If it wasn't hard work, it wouldn't be considered valuable enough to be called wisdom; it would just be common sense. Those who want wise answers, but will accept nothing more than common sense, won't find wise answers. That was the basic gist of F. A. Shaeffer's work: sitting down with the people to struggle to find the answers, with all the love, work, commitment, and submission it took to get there.

I hope this helps you to understand Schaeffer a bit better.