Ang apologetics ay isang science and art kung paano i-defend ang ating pananampalataya from objections laban dito. Lahat ng mga Christians ay called to practice apologetics. Ito ay dahil makikita natin mismo sa sinabi ni Apostle Paul na part ng ministry ng gospel ang pag defend sa gospel. Sabi nga ni Paul sa Philippians 1:7, “It is right for me to feel this way about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel.” In light of this siyempre ay mapapatanong tayo about sa different methods kung paano ba i-defend ang ating faith. Sa current na series natin ay I will talk about ang methodology na tinatawag na classical apologetics. Pagkatapos ng talk natin about sa classical apologetics ay pag-uusapan natin sa mga susunod na broadcast ang mga iba’t ibang argumento na napapabilang sa methodology na ito upang maging mas familiar tayo rito. Sa ngayon ay magbibigay muna ako ng introduction patungkol sa kung ano ba ang classical apologetics bilang isang methodology. Ang magiging basis natin sa pag explain kung ano ang classical apologetics ay ang libro ni Steven Cowan sa Five Views on Apologetics kung saan ay may contribution ang apologist na si William Lane Craig about classical apologetics.
Basically ay Dr. Craig showed na ang methodological approach for classical apologetics is to use reason in the form of rational arguments and evidence ay essential for us to show that Christianity is true, though ang reason only has a secondary or contingent na role in personally knowing that Christianity is true. The reason is that ang proper ground of us knowing Christianity to be true ay based sa inner witness ng Holy Spirit sa ating hearts. We will share about this distinction of showing Christianity to be true and knowing Christianity to be true for us to appreciate the classical method. Ang classical na approach ay practiced ni Thomas Aquinas, Hugo Grotius, at William Paley. Three notable people na we know in our generation who practice it is si William Lane Craig, si R.C. Sproul who died last December 17, 2017, and si Norman Geisler who died last July 1, 2019. Ang classical na approach ay binubuo ng natural theology at Christian evidences. Ang natural theology ay defined as a way of reflecting on the existence and nature of God na independent sa divine revelation. Ang ginagamit nila typically ay ang human reason and also observation ng nature or ng universe. Ang mga example naman nito ay ang cosmological, teleological, moral, at ontological arguments for God’s existence. Ang Christian evidences naman ay evidence that particularly make a case for the truthfulness of Christianity. Ang examples nito ay ang arguments ni Geisler such as miracles, reliability of the scriptures, the resurrection of Jesus, the divinity of Christ, and the authority of the Bible. Just a quick comment, we will explain each of the mentioned arguments for us to grasp the big picture better so no worries if di niyo gets what is being referred to. Going back, in showing Christianity to be true, ang classical apologists would see na necessary ang pag gamit ng natural theology and Christian evidences, or in other words ay to show arguments muna for theism or God’s existence, then arguments specific that show Christianity to be true. Ito ang key na distinctive ng classical apologetics when we compare it with the evidentialist approach. Sila Sproul, Gerstner, and Lindsley would argue kasi na meaningless ang argument if hindi preceded ang miracles ng natural theology. Norman Geisler agrees with this na dapat natural theology muna bago Christian evidences. An evidentialist kasi na apologist like Gary Habermas would differ in a sense that we don’t need natural theology to precede Christian evidences. We can use for example, ang resurrection ni Jesus as a starting point, and when we are able to show it to be true, it retrospectively shows that God exists and that Jesus’ message is credible. Ito ang key difference between classical and evidentialist apologetics though they agree on many parts.
In justifying classical apologetics in Scripture, Craig commented on kathoratai on Romans 1:20, which means clearly perceive and discern. Sabi niya na puwede ito mag indicate na involved ang inferential reasoning sa pag perceive ng invisible nature ni God sa creation. Basically ang inferential reasoning ay you reach a conclusion based on reasoning and evidence. Isa siyang proseso where we use our reason to see whether or not a proposition is true, which leads us to a rational na conclusion. A very close parallel daw ayon sa mga commentators ng Romans passage ay ang Hellenistic na work na Wisdom of Solomon 13:1-9 kung saan clearly in view ang inferential reasoning. Higit pa rito ay sa Acts 14:17 na kahit God allowed the Gentiles to go in their own way, He did not leave them without evidence or testimony, which is binubuo ng created order. Plausible raw ito na interpretation which shows na legitimate ang pag gamit ng natural theology. Sa pag show naman ng Christian faith to be true, he cited ang appeal ng gospel writers sa miracles and fulfilled prophecy ni Jesus to show ang veracity ng kanyang message. Ang example nito ay ang practice ni Jesus sa Luke 24:25–27 and John 14:11, and ang sermon ni Peter sa Acts 2:22-32. Aside from what we had talked about in showing Christianity to be true, it’s important to note na ang role ng Holy Spirit in showing Christianity to be true is not to supply ang pagkukulang natin sa ating mga arguments. What He does ay ang pag move sa heart ng unbelievers to weaken their sinful na prejudices and for them to open their minds to consider the arguments.
Now that we were able to talk about showing Christianity to be true and a brief scriptural basis sa method ng classical apologetics, let’s talk about knowing Christianity to be true which is based sa inner witness ng Holy Spirit. Ang role daw ng witness ng Holy Spirit ay self-authenticating. This means na intrinsic siya na defeater ng mga defeaters brought against our faith. Ang defeater basically is a belief na if true will show na another belief is false. This means na we don’t need additional arguments or evidence for us to know na we experience God’s Spirit. It’s an immediate experience and not a proposition, like the way we see a beautiful scenery which is hard to describe using words, pero we know na maganda ang nakita natin na scenery. Ang subjective na assurance na ito gives us objective knowledge of the truth and ang experience overwhelms ang mga arguments na thrown against us. Ang analogy which I could give ay if you witnessed a murder. Dahil you are a primary witness ay sure ka kung sino ang pumatay. Even if you were framed to make it seem na you committed ang murder, kahit gaano ka solid ang argumentation nila against you ay resolved ka in your heart na you did not commit the crime. One passage that show this witness ay ang Romans 8:15-17, “For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!” The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him.” Another ay ang Galatians 4:6, “Because you are his sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, “Abba, Father.” Ang role lamang ng argument and evidence in knowing Christianity to be true ay ang tinatawag ni Martin Luther na ang ministerial use of reason, which means na subordinate sa ating faith ang reason. This makes our faith secure in times na wala tayong evidence or argument for our faith.
In summary, we showed what classical apologetics is by showing yung distinction nito from evidential apologetics when we talked about showing Christianity to be true. We also talked briefly about yung scriptural basis for the practice. We also talked about yung knowing Christianity to be true na aspect ng classical apologetics to show na ang ultimate foundation ng faith ng isang Christian ay hindi based sa evidence ng arguments, kasi a Christian could still believe rationally kahit wala siyang access sa evidence and arguments. Next broadcast ay we will talk about arguments that show that God exists which will start on the contingency argument.
