Nepaug Bible Church - http://www.nepaugchurch.org - Pastor's Sermon Notes - http://www.nepaugchurch.org/Sermons/zz20040905.htm

ANSWERING OTHERS WITH REASONS FOR OUR FAITH
Part I: The Justification And Pattern For Apologetics From The Pulpit
(1 Peter 3:14-16)

Introduction: (To show the need . . . )

Some months ago after one of our Church members made the request that I start a sermon series on Christian Apologetics, the study that defends the validity of our Christian faith, I agreed to do so, planning to start it this month when students were back in secular schools where they often face professors who counter Bible truth.

However, a big debate exists in some Christian circles on whether a Pastor should even use pulpit time to preach on Christian Apologetics. Norm Geisler mentions this difference of opinion in the introduction to his book, When Skeptics Ask, p. 9, so I must address it before going into a sermon series on Christian Apologetics in order to settle and unify our hearts on the matter.

The opposing arguments that we must address can be stated with Biblical support for each respective side as follows:

(a) On the one hand, Romans 1:16-17 tells us that the power of God unto salvation is Christ's Gospel, not Christian Apologetics. We also know God calls the pastor to make his pulpit ministry an exposition of God's Word itself rather than departing from Bible exposition to make his words a ministry ABOUT Scripture, 2 Tim. 3:15-4:4, and Christian Apologetics emphasises facts ABOUT Scripture often drawn from sources outside of Scripture!

Thus, some argue Christian Apologetics has no place in the pulpit.

(b) On the other hand, 1 Peter 3:15 KJV tells every believer to "be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you . . ." and the word for "answer" there is the Greek term, apologia from which we get the term "apologetics"! Peter thus called us all to have a working knowledge of Christian Apologetics so we can answer everyone who asks us the logical reason for why we believe what we do; as this is the duty of all Peter's readers who were scattered throughout what is now northern Turkey (1 Peter 1:1), "laymen" must then be taught apologetics in Church ministries!

Accordingly, BEFORE we START a series on Christian Apologetics, we must discern HOW we are to heed God's call to deliver ONLY the Word of God from the pulpit while ALSO teaching believers how to answer all the questions ABOUT the Bible and its teachings that critics raise -- how we are to do BOTH!



(We turn to the sermon "Need" section . . . )

Need: "Scripture calls pastors not to depart from making Bible exposition ITSELF their ministry while ALSO calling us ALL to prepare to defend our faith, and that (Christian Apologetics) often involves dealing with facts NOT expounded from Scripture ITSELF! HOW then would GOD have us ALL become proficient in defending our faith without sacrificing Bible exposition from the pulpit?!"
  1. When Peter wrote his 1 Peter 3:14-16 CHARGE for believers to prepare to defend their faith before critics, he was living in Rome just before Nero began to persecute Christians, Ryrie Study Bible, KJV, 1978 ed., p. 1757, "Introduction to the First Letter Of Peter."
  2. His CHARGE arose out of Peter's concern that Christians were often criticized for their "otherworldliness" and for what appeared to be disloyalty for actions like not taking customary oaths to the gods in courts of law, E. M. Burns, West. Civs., 6th ed., p. 235.
  3. We then view Peter's 1 Peter 3:14-16 call with the example of its use by the first martyr, Stephen to discern the Biblical justification for and a pattern of Christian Apologetics from the pulpit:
    1. First, we must become properly related to God to be EFFECTIVE in facing challenging interrogators, 1 Peter 3:14-15a; Acts 6:5:
      1. Peter's call not to fear one's questioners but to regard God as holy alludes to Isaiah 8:12-13, U. B. S. Greek N.T., 1966 ed., p. 798.
      2. There, God's prophet, Isaiah had called Judah to fear so as to trust God above all of their other fears related to a Gentile invasion!
      3. Thus, like Stephen did in Acts 6:5, believers must heed and trust Christ over fearing their questioners to be used effectively by God.
    2. Second, we must LEARN our FACTS BEFORE meeting critics:
      1. The word, "answer" in 1 Peter 3:15b (apologian) is a defense a party gives before a judge, Ibid.; Bib. Know. Com., N. T., p. 850.
      2. Thus, we must always be prepared to give a defense of our faith so that, if confronted with "problem questions" others, we have the facts to inform them of the truth, 1 Peter 3:15b,c in the context.
      3. Now, we are not to try to plan how to control a meeting with a critic -- only God can do that, cf. Mtt. 10:18-20; rather, we must know our facts beforehand so Lord can call them to our mind once we are in the fray as in Stephen's case, cf. John 14:26; Acts 6:9-10!
    3. Third, we should be polite in encountering difficult interrogators to be effective in our witness, 1 Peter 3:15d; Acts 7:1-2a, 59-60:
      1. The word "meekness" (KJV) or "gentleness" (NIV) is prautaytos, and it pictures a "mild and gentle friendliness" the Greeks highly valued, U. B. S. Greek N.T.; T.D.N.T., vol. VI, p. 646.
      2. Then, the word "fear" (KJV) or "respect" (NIV) here suggests one's respect for others, 1 Peter 3:15d; Ibid., Bible. Know. Com., N.T.
      3. We must thus be polite when others challenge our beliefs so they will face the facts we convey instead rather than complain about our demeanor to the harm of our witness, 1 Peter 3:15d-16.
      4. Note how, though telling his opponents the facts in Acts 7:51-53, Stephen yet related graciously with them acc. to Acts 7:1-2, 59-60.
    4. Fourth, as Stephen exampled in his defense before the Sanhedrin, we can present our defense WHILE EXPOUNDING Scripture to heed 2 Timothy 3:15-4:5 (cf. Acts 6:11-15 with Acts 7:1-53):
      1. Stephen was charged with teaching (a) Christ would destroy the temple (b) and change the customs Moses gave Israel, and brought before the Hebrew Sanhedrin to give an answer, Acts 6:11-15; 7:1.
      2. In response, he Biblically expounded Israel's history to reveal his Christian Apologetic, Acts 7:2-50 with 7:51-53:
        1. To the charge he would change Moses' customs (6:14), Stephen explained from Scripture that his critics mimicked their fathers who had rejected men like Joseph and even Moses when God had called them to lead Israel into new programs, Acts 7:9-16, 17-43. In the same way, Stephen claimed his critics had errantly rejected Jesus who had come offering God's Kingdom, 7:51-52.
        2. To the charge Jesus would destroy the temple, Stephen cited Scripture that revealed the earthly temple was a mere pattern of a better, heavenly one (Acts 7:44), and that the current temple was not that important to God (Acts 7:48-50); Christ's replacing the current temple in His future kingdom only fit the Scriptures!
Application: May we (1) trust in Christ for salvation and (2) depend on Him in our encounters with questioners, Jn. 3:16; 15:6. (3) Also, may we study the facts BEFORE we encounter opponents to become able to defend our faith before them, and (4) interact with them politely for impact. (5) Like Stephen did, from the PULPIT, we can use Bible exposition as the framework for our apologetics, connecting related Bible passages to the issues pertinent to defending the REASON for our faith!

Lesson: God does NOT want us to REPLACE Bible exposition with Christian Apologetics, but to USE Scripture IN our apologetic STANDS.

Conclusion: (To illustrate the sermon lesson . . . )

 To show how we will use Bible exposition IN our presentation of Christian Apologetics, we provide the following illustration:

(a) Some critics claim the presence of moral evil in the world means the Bible's God Who is presented as All-powerful and All-good is not what He claims to be, and thus the Bible's message is not to be taken seriously! (cf. Geisler/Brooks, When Skeptics Ask, p. 59-60)

(b) Dr. Norman Geisler has answered this charge with the following apologetic in his book, Philosophy of Religion, p. 377:

"The theistic God is absolutely perfect. Such a God need not create anything, let alone a world with moral beings in it. But if He decides to make a world with free beings, it must be the best He is capable of producing. For doing less than His best would be an evil for God. But an optimally perfect moral world should contain the following components: (1) the process leading to the final achievement of a world where men are free but never will do any evil; (2) a world wherein is permitted the full and final uncoerced exercise of moral freedom; (3) a world in which there is permitted the presence of enough evil to provide both the condition for the achievement of higher moral virtues and a comprehensive lesson of the wrongness of evil for free creatures; (4) a world where free creatures learn for themselves why evil is wrong. Now, a world where sin never occurred certainly could not fulfill the requirements for an optimally perfect moral world. In fact, it is difficult to conceive of a world that would better suit these conditions than the world we now live in. And the absolutely perfect and powerful God of theism is both the only hope and the ultimate assurance that the greatest moral perfection will be finally achieved from this present world."

Dr. Geisler's argument FITS the Biblical exposition of Genesis 1:1-3:24 with Revelation 22:1-5: as a perfect, moral God chose a plan of history that would yield optimum moral excellence in His letting man freely sin only to have God save him by grace so he can eat of the Tree of Life -- it is all there! We merely need to expound those Scriptures, connecting them with Dr. Geisler's apologetic to BRING the critic who has a problem with the existence of moral evil in a universe where a morally upright God exists to a LOGICAL basis for accepting Christ's Gospel! From there on, the CRITIC has no option but to deal with GOD!