Role of Apologetics
Link: Respectable Apologist Fried for "Inflammatory Remarks"
Without any derogatory intentions whatsoever, I find this to be an an article of interest. It just so happens that one reflection question I've given to my students this semester is:
What, in your assessment, is the role of apologetics today in the proclamation of the Christian message?
The following is an answer extracted from one of my students' papers:
Propositions are secondary to a personal encounter with the Truth because the Truth is a person. It is and must be personal and relational knowledge. The Pharisees of Jesus' time were not ignorant of truth as revealed through Moses' laws. Yet Jesus' harshest words were directed at them. They knew truth but did not know the Truth! Truth came as a person, the person ofChrist. The Word became flesh. Mere apologetics, however logical and brilliant, is insufficient.
Brilliant answer. Deep and thoughtful. An insightful point which certainly deserves the points. We don't see apologetics with disdain, for it constitutes a part of the Christian tradition. However, we need to face the reality that we now live in a world that criticises the inadequacy of mere propositional truth. Truth alone isn't enough, they say.
Whilst the apologist proclaims truth to the world, the world says truth isn't enough. We can either keep loud hailing what we deem to be proclamations of the truth, or we can start focusing on the sacramental embodiment of relational truth. We may defensively claim that the two aren't mutually exclusive, of course, but the medium of proclamation inevitably betrays our bias.
If we don't start getting our art of apologetics right, we may end up having more apologising to do.
Note from the Editor: Just for the record, I wanted to clarify that I have heard this apologist speaking in person and have met him face-to-face before. I have also read almost all his books that were available to me. And I believe I've heard almost every single one of his messages that have been aired on radio before. Just in case I'm deemed to be critiquing from afar...you never know!
Comments (5)
Hi Sherman!
A little bird told me about your blog. Said its not a blog but a BOOK!
I read my husband's blog all the time and when I read yours, I really think that the 2 of you have much in common.
Had a good laugh when you said that it must be cool to wear the white coats in the hospital (the doctors). I really think that James would disagree with you. I have so many of them boxed up in my house because he gave up wearing them as the hospital is so hot and "aircondition-less" in the wards.
Like your blogging.
Signing out...
Denise
Posted by Denise Koh | April 28, 2006 9:26 AM
Hi Denise! Blogging is for when I have lots of things to say and nobody to say them to. HAHAH. Thanks for dropping by! And see you at church camp! :)
Posted by SK | April 28, 2006 2:23 PM
Without wanting to sound 'defensive', ehem, the Ravi I ever knew has always stressed *both* absolute truth *and* relational/personal knowledge of God... :)
Could we be listening to the same person?
Posted by Hedonese | May 3, 2006 6:57 PM
I expect/hope Ravi will respond to clarify misunderstandings and/or apologise (if he needs to).
I *really* hope Ravi was misunderstood and that he did NOT, to take one example, link/hint/associate Buddhism with prostitution in Thailand, as this would go against his own counsel to not judge a philosophy by its abuse.
The final thing is, adopting the context of Sherman's post, that Ravi (and his supporters) should reflect on how much *this kind* of apologetics communicate and mediate the presence of Jesus (or if it could've done so in a better manner).
Posted by Alwyn | May 4, 2006 11:12 AM
1. Does RZIM have a response to this official complaint? It is a substantial one (whether or not we agree with their reasoning or logic). If there's a misunderstanding or misquote - perhaps there was also a clarification? I'm curious.
2. I think we in Asia are facing a tremendous challenge in the "kind" of apologetics that can create space rather than distance. So, I agree with learning a better art for our apologetics :-)
3. Some pathways forward: First, there's always the
basic clearing mis-information bits. Second, it's maintaining a high standard of self-critical ness (watching our own planks, acknowledging when necessary) Third, a proper confidence in sharing our "story" and engaging the "others" (and differing viewpoints or even complaints) Fourth, with humility raise questions when we don't understand or would like to challenge the "other" to reconsider.
4. Add to the list .. there must be more to this.
Posted by Sivin | May 4, 2006 11:53 AM