Please note; this is still being worked on!! Thank you for your patience
1 Peter 3:15-16 but treat the Messiah as holy, as Lord in your hearts; while remaining always ready to give a reasoned answer to anyone who asks you to explain the hope you have in you- yet with humility and fear, keeping your conscience clear, so that when you are spoken against, those who abuse the good behavior flowing from your union with the Messiah may be put to shame.
As I continue on my journey to the city of God, I cannot help but look around and see the numerous techniques and sometimes what I call gimmicks borrowed, and then used by others who have designated themselves “Biblical apologists”. The source of the arguments are either never investigated or they “philosophers” of our age know where they came from and deliberately merge the arguments into Christianity and say “trust us, we are philisophical Christians.”
Why do men do what they do? Why do men think they are given the task to “prove” God exists when Romans 1 tells us we already know this to be true? As I look at the apologetical abuse I cannot help but make observations and comments from the first Chapter of Romans to show this apologetical abuse and make my case. So bear with me as I give my observations.
Romans 1:18-19 For God’s wrath is being revealed from heaven against all the ungodliness and wickedness of those who in their wickedness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God himself has made it plain to them.
Romans 1 says the wrath of God abides upon us because we take God’s general revelation, that which has been provided and exhibited, that is, his eternal power and divine nature, and He says it has been clearly understood through observation. Because it is so obviously plain, so clear and so apparent within us, this general information renders all mankind inexcusable. It is innate. That is to say the information the Lord provides is both internal and it is also external. We can simply observe the creation and know that we are not living in a dark cave. But, mankind deleberately ignores and suppresses what God has revealed to us.
The word is katecho in the Greek. Paul tells us that we take the truth of general revelation and hold the truth back, keep from the truth or as most translations render it, suppress the truth. Notice I said general revelation and not revealed revelation. This will come up later.
Romans 1:20 says; For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes-his eternal power and divine nature-have been understood and observed by what he made, so that people are without excuse.
Instead of believing and as a result gravitating toward God we pursue anything but! We are therefore without excuse.
The word excuse is a very familiar word for many of us and this word is associated with the topic. The word excuse in the Greek is the word anapologetos. It means without defense or excuse. that which cannot be defended and is inexcusable. We have no excuse, we have no reason for denying that which God has made evident. Because we can see His awesome abilities and His invisible power through general revelation we are told not to waste our money on a Lawyer who will somehow get us out of trouble.
As a result of purposely suppressing his invisible attributes-his eternal power and divine nature, which are understood and observed by what he made we are rightly judged. This is essentially idolatry and idolatry is the root of all sin.
The truth of God made s are thinking is futile. What is futile thinking?
They all appeal to the above passage in First Peter, to justify why they do what they do. That is not to say they are all in it because it is a cash cow or a pride cow or a way to tap dance around those in false religions. Some are serious, some are sincere and some mean well I’m sure of it. Some are what I was ten and twenty years ago. Having all this knowledge of the Bible and the false religions due to sitting under the teaching of Dr. Walter Martin, caused me to pound the pavement to advance the cause of the Lord and His Messiah. Proving others were wrong theologically was put first before the gospel of grace. And the emphasis on the doctrine called justification? Hardly was it spoken of. At that time in my life I had been immature and ignored the larger picture of what it meant to defend the faith. There I was, driving down the road and I could spot Mormons 300 yards away on their bicycles. I would first anticipate their direction, drive like a madman to get to the corner, find a place to park and when they arrived, just happen to be standing there with my Bible in hand along with crucial photocopies of LDS documentation.
I now rejoice that that was then and this is now. Back then, I was caught up in the spirit of the abuse of apologetics because I was amongst others who were like minded. I look back at my life and lay that part of my life before you as sort of a confession. I had unknowingly replaced the emphasis of the gospel with a different style or way to make converts. I had not willfully set out to depart from the proclamation of the gospel; I was just a product of the evangelical movement that was more interested in conversion no matter how it took place. “Winning” souls for the Messiah was all that mattered and this was done by making an argument against the faith of a person who held to faith in their organization and their self designated prophet.
One problem I can identify as a motive for how I did apologetics was as I said earlier. I was driven by the spirit of the evangelical movement. That included the wonderful influence of sitting under Dr. Walter Martin. I wanted nothing more than to be just like him. I am not speaking negatively of old Walter. He had good intentions and he knew his stuff. But, when the sovereignty of God is replaced with arguments, arguments originating from men like Thomas Aquinas who borrowed from the pagan Greek philosopher named Aristotle; two men who do not know the Lord or His gospel, then most of the time we end up casting pearls before swine because we are attempting to “prove” to all the world that God exists from manmade arguments. We do not have to prove God exists because all mankind already has that knowledge innate within us. I’ll talk more on that in a moment.
A man or woman can only be converted by the simple message of the gospel. Nothing more and nothing less. In the passage of First Peter, there is one word often neglected or ignored and that is the word “ask” in the English language I cannot say whether or not a person in an apologetical ministry is purposely ignoring this word or not. If this word helps guide the reason for the apologetics and specifically who it is we give the defense, then many apologetical ministries could be done for and shut down.
The word ask in the Greek is aiteo. Its meaning? To ask, to beg, to call for, to crave, to desire or to require.
In light of the word and its definitions, what is it most people in the church do today? They do not wait for a person to ask. They do not wait for the person to crave or desire or call for or beg for, the reason for our hope. Nope, the evangelical starts with the attitude of beginning an often times unsolicited approach with the unregenerate person by beginning with what is called the cosmological argument. Did the person “ask” for the hope that the evangelical has? Ninety percent of the time the unregenerate person did not ask for a reason. Most unregenerate persons do not care about our hope and that is just the facts. They are as happy as pigs in the mud. What are the origins of the cosmological argument? Let me use Wikipedia for a quick definition and the players involved.
“Plato (c. 427–347 BCE) and Aristotle (c. 384–322 BCE) both posited first cause arguments, though each had certain notable caveats. Plato posited a basic argument in The Laws (Book X), in which he argued that motion in the world and the Cosmos was “imparted motion” that required some kind of “self-originated motion” to set it in motion and to maintain that motion. Plato also posited a “demiurge” of supreme wisdom and intelligence as the creator of the Cosmos in his work Timaeus. For Plato, the demiurge lacked the supernatural ability to create ex nihilo (out of nothing). It was only able to organize the ananke (necessity), the only other co-existent element or presence in Plato’s cosmogony.
“Aristotle also put forth the idea of a First Cause, often referred to as the “Prime Mover” or “Unmoved Mover” (πρῶτον κινοῦν ἀκίνητον or primus motor) in his work Metaphysics. For Aristotle too, as for Plato, the underlying essence of the Universe always was in existence and always would be (which in turn follows Parmenides’ famous statement that “nothing can come from nothing”). Aristotle posited an underlying ousia (essence or substance) of which the Universe was composed, and it was this ousia that the Prime Mover organized and set into motion. The Prime Mover did not organize matter physically, but was instead a being who constantly thought about thinking itself, and who organized the Cosmos by making matter the object of “aspiration or desire”. The Prime Mover was, to Aristotle, a “thinking on thinking”, an eternal process of pure thought….
Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225–1274 CE), probably the best-known theologian of Medieval Europe, adapted the argument he found in his reading of Aristotle and Avicenna to form one of the most influential versions of the cosmological argument. His conception of First Cause was the idea that the Universe must have been caused by something that was itself uncaused, which he asserted was God.
Many other philosophers and theologians have posited cosmological arguments both before and since Aquinas. The versions sampled in the following sections are representative of the most common derivations of the argument.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_argument
Many other philosophers and theologians is an understatement! Men who say they represent they are Protestants and who say they represent the church can’t get enough of their Aristotle and Aquinas fix. Men like Norman Geisler who graduated from a Roman Catholic Seminary. William Lane Craig and R. C. Sproul, et al, have lectured, written books, or continue to write books identifying Aristotle and Aquinas as primary sources of truth. It sounds like a conspiracy theory, but do they have an agenda to make the church more accepting of these Pagans? I can’t help but think there is a motive or desire by them to have us embrace men like Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas was no friend of the Lord’s! Any man who belongs to Rome is an enemy of God’s and under the curse of God according to Galatians 1.
When you see these men constantly advance these pagan and Roman Catholic philosophers in almost every book written on the subject of apologetics, it appears safe to say the church will become numb, putting her guard down and giving into the enemies of the gospel as one of us. Although he graduated from Loyola University, would Norman Geisler push a quiet agenda, lulling us to tolerance and become more and more accepting of Aquinas, the Roman Catholic who wrote in defense of the Roman Catholic Church and spread a false gospel?
As a Messianic Jew, I have a tremendous problem with so-called Christians using Pagan philosophers and men who are under the anathema of God to make the case for God. Men who write books for the gullible sheep and fill the bibliography section with references to the men like Aristotle and Aquinas. Heck, to show you just how far these men go consider this; I own a book called “Not A Chance” by R.C. Sproul. The book was dedicated to a man named Stanley Jaki. Who is Stanley Jaki? I’ll leave you to do your homework. But, I will say this; Jaki is a Roman Catholic Priest and therefore an enemy of the gospel. He has written numerous books promoting Rome. I can see it now; Paul writing to the church and dedicating the book to a friend who is a known Judaizer. Does that sound possible? Not if you believe in no compromise! Why do we tolerate this? Because, in the name of tolerance we accept this compromise. No one would dare say Geisler is an enemy. What do the fruits suggest? how much betrayal will it take to get our attention?
Do not cast pearls before swine. Using apologetics to “win” souls brings only religious people into the sheep pen. Conversions are not created by man’s efforts or arguments. Apologetics do not have the power to change and save souls. The gospel alone is the power of God unto salvation. It seems to me people are trying to avoid the only means necessary prescribed by God. They would rather make people religious and get their cheeks in the pews by that way instead of the gospel.
“Moshe, why do you have such a bad attitude about this topic?” One, it makes the gospel second to human arguments. Two; it shows that a person believes apologetics is apparently more effective in winning souls then the gospel message. Three is probably the most important and significant; Men and women already know God exists! Romans 1 tell us that that is the reason for the wrath of God upon all mankind. Men and women do not have a hole in their heart for God. they have a hole in their heart for anything but God. This includes other gods or the refusal to believe in the Creator. We are religious by nature and seek anything other than the God of Creation.
Apologetics is not offensive when used by many. Apologetics can be very neutral and user friendly in most cases depending upon the subject. It can persuade someone to go to church because it offers certain arguments for them to go to church. It often meets the needs of religious people.
Convince me there is a god and I will immediately go to church.
I may step on the toes of some in this next paragraph, but it falls under apologetiical abuse. That is, the debating with heretics over and over again. I think of high profile Mormon men who defend the idolatry of Mormonism. The Mormon, Van Hale in particular. Hale was already dealt with and debated in the past by Dr. Walter Martin. For some unknown reason, others think it appropriate to continue the debate years later. By that I am talking about James White and his continued debate/dialog with Mr. Van Hale. I do consider White to be a believer. But, a confused believer driven by his apologetical abuse. Listening to the CD put out by Alpha and Omega Ministries bothered me greatly because we do not continue to debate those who have already heard the gospel time and time again. Mr. White had what I would call a very generous conversation with Mr. Hale over the telephone which involved questions from the listeners. Anyone who has listened to the original debate with Walter Martin and Mr. Hale knows Mr. Hale was exposed and the truth of the Scriptures was presented clearly. Mr. Hale has never repented of his hostile idolatry and we must follow Romans 16. Have nothing to do with men who bring contrary doctrine.
What makes James White think he could possibly say more than Dr. Martin did years ago? What drives James White to continue debates with others like Father Pacwa? These are men who, in the light of Romans 1, have possibly been marked by God and been given over to a depraved mind to permanently believe in lies.
Romans 1:28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.
This is not to pick on Brother White, but he needs to be approached on this matter. I have sent emails with no response. When a person does not listen to a person sent by the Lord with the message of the cross, we are to shake off the dust from our feet! Therefore there is no Scriptural reason for White to return to debate with an antimessiah. How much more should we avoid casual and repeated conversations or an irenic defense of the Scriptures to men under the anathema of God! These are men, like Mr. Hale, who need only to hear one word and that is, repent and believe the gospel presented in the Scriptures and abandon old Joe!
Making an argument for the existence of God is not only unbiblical, it has already been done. Romans 1 is very clear that the knowledge of God’s invisible attributes are clearly seen. Question? How do we see the “invisible”
Many do not like it when I say that, but the Messiah stated there were rules when witnessing. Nevertheless, because of these influences I had once memorized and taught the five arguments to prove that God exists and yet, never looked into the roots of the arguments.
I praise the Lord that he has had grace on my ignorance. Why do I say that? Because we are not called to prove the existence of God. Romans Chapter 1 tells us that the wrath of God abides on all mankind because WE KNOW God exists, but, we suppress the truth and pursue lies.
Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.
This passage above is not shy and does not tone down the reason for God’s anger as many individuals in the church have done. We do not go to a place of everlasting torment because we have rejected the Messiah. This is the mindset taught in the evangelical church today. This is the mindset believed by those who reject the Messiah. We go to Gehenna because we are actively suppressing the truth of God. The modern evangelical teaches others that a person has to reject Jesus as their Lord in order to go to hell. that is one facet on a large diamond. The Messiah said, “he who does not believe stands condemned already.” So, it is not a matter of a choice.
The atheist is doing exactly what the Scriptures teach. He or she suppresses truth regarding The Creator as if there will be no accountability. On the contrary, it is easy to hold your fist up to God and deny his existence because you are not dead yet! Give it time, the death toll is still one per person and you shall pay it. The self proclaimed atheist will give an account to the Creator who loaned that atheist the air he or she breathes each day to curse the God they deny.
The charge of idolatry is laid to the account of all mankind. Arguing against the existence of God is not necessarily the only thing we do. There is also what I call doctrinal idolatry. Men and women who say they believe in God, but they dismiss his attributes. That is, they will not believe the characteristics that make God, God. They have a sort of salad bar god that they walk up to and pick and choose what meets their needs.
Belief in God and belief in his characteristics are a package deal. It is not up for negotiation. Maintaining a view that God is 80 or 90 percent sovereign, but in the same breath saying He has given me the choice to act according to my will is not the Lord. He must be 100 percent sovereign or you have created a hybrid god. A god made in your image and your likeness. How do we know who is one of the Lord’s? Let me hear what he or she has to say about the attributes of the Lord. Let me hear from that individual that God is not in control over the affairs of mankind and I shall give you your answer.
We are not called to prove the existence of God. We know He exists and but for the grace of God we should all perish in our Adamic state. The abuse of apologetics is on the rise. It is a dangerous field because it has incorporated humanism into Christianity for hundreds of years. As it stands, human reason has become superior to the Scripture. Sort of like painting the pig with gold spray paint. It is still a pig! Decorating philosophy with Christian terms does not change what is inside. It does not change the content. It masquerades the content.
But, this is nothing new. Rome demoted the Scriptures centuries ago when she decided to promote a man to stand over them and judge them. Rome has been the greatest enemy of the truth of God because she introduced pagan Greek philosophy into the message of God. Because of the teachings of Aquinas, Aristotle has continued in spirit to impress not only Rome, but those who write books among the evangelicals. Men like Norman Geisler and William Lane Craig have nothing to offer believers when it comes as a diluted form of God. Psalm 1 teaches us; “blessed is the man that walks not in the counsel of the ungodly..” Any man or woman who goes to pagan Greek philosophy to argue for God is no friend to the Lord.
I will write a large article on my other site detailing the heresies of Rome and the reason to get out of her. As you will begin to see, it is my intention to Judaize Christianity. To remind the people of God that we are children of Avraham and we must begin to act like it. Salvation is from the Jews and we have a Jewish Messiah. If you are a believer in the Lord then stop playing with the enemies of the bridegroom. When you do, you are guilty of idolatry and adultery.
Moshe