Strategic & Targeted: How Apologetics Should Inform our Prayer Life || Julie Loos, Ratio Christi (Feb 27, 2018)

Hey friends, it’s Julie Loos of Mama Bear Apologetics, a partner of Ratio Christi International. Mama Bear Apologetics exists to equip moms to answer the tough questions of the faith. These questions start in the home, and moms are usually the first ones to hear them. So, let’s band together and educate ourselves. You can follow Mama Bear Apologetics on the web, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and iTunes.

Today’s topic is “How Apologetics Can Help Our Prayer Life be More Strategic and Targeted.”

Our world is full of anti-Christian worldviews infecting our kids. There is an even higher probability of infection when placed in a college environment where the exposure rate to these worldviews increases exponentially. It is a breeding ground for doubt, disillusionment, and defeat of their Christian beliefs. Lack of immunity from a young age can make them easily succumb to attacks on their faith. And it’s due in part to intellectual skepticism and doubt brought on by lack of training in what they believe, why they believe it, and how to defend it.

It’s enough to bring us moms to our knees in prayer. And thankfully, it’s beginning to bring more of us back to our Bibles and bookstores for apologetics training.

Today we’re going to talk about how apologetics study can make our prayer life more strategic and targeted. This knowledge that we gain through studying the defense of our faith can be used to pray in a way that is informed by scripture, tempered by knowledge of the culture, and applied with wisdom.

Many of us moms are zealous to pray for our kids when they are in trouble. And that’s a good thing. But listen to what Proverbs 19:2 a (NIV) tells us, “It is not good to have zeal without knowledge.” That zeal in prayer can and should be accompanied with knowledge—which is an accurately informed mind. Then remember what our Lord commands us in Matthew 22:37—we are to love him with all our mind. Other translations expand that to loving him with (MSG) all our passion, prayer, intelligence (DRA); our whole mind (Darby); our understanding (AMP) and intellect. And don’t forget that according to 1 Peter 3:15 we are to always be ready to give a defense—a reason—for our hope with gentleness and respect.

I believe the work of defending the faith cannot succeed apart from prayer, and the work of prayer can become more effective when informed by apologetics. I believe that through prayer and apologetics we can help our children stand for truth on campus and in culture and spur revival and spiritual awakening which historically has led to cultural transformation.

Apologist Francis Shaeffer said: It is important to remember, first of all, that we cannot separate true apologetics from the work of the Holy Spirit, nor from a living relationship in prayer to the Lord on the part of the Christian. We must understand that eventually the battle is not just against flesh and blood.

Be inspired and instructed by the example of Moses in Exodus 17 as explained in the book “The Front Line—A Prayer Warriors’ Guide to Spiritual Battle.” Moses prayed over the battle, while the soldiers fought in the valley. His prayer won the battle in conjunction with what was done in the natural. This mission is a tandem effort as we engage the enemy on all fronts.

The tandem effort for us moms is prayer coupled with apologetics—that’s how we can engage the enemy, the father of lies, and his deceptive philosophies, on all fronts—in the spiritual through prayer and in the natural by arming our kids with apologetics while they fight the worldview conflict on campus and in culture.

So, here’s what I would like to encourage and equip you to do as you begin or continue you study in apologetics--couple it with prayer. Here’s a four-step approach you can use.

1. Praise—this is praying to God about himself, offering worship based on his character, his attributes, his Names. It’s all about WHO he is NOT what he’s done. Think of it this way: I praise you God for you are _________. Fill it the blank about God. This is a great place to start in your prayer time because it sets our eyes on Jesus and not on our circumstances. Praise is the atmosphere within which we should pray.

2. Confession—getting right with God. Unclogging the pipeline in your communication with him. Recognizing sins of omission and commission. Naming them. Agreeing it was wrong. Asking for forgiveness and power to overcome. Confession also helps us approach God in humility.

3. Thanksgiving—now’s your chance to give God glory for what he has done or will do based on his nature. Shine the spotlight on God. It develops an attitude of gratitude. You learn how to be thankful in all things when you can’t always thank him for all things.

4. Intercession—asking on behalf of others or petition which usually refers to asking for yourself. Ask scripturally. Ask specifically. Asking in His name means with his authority and his motivation—not our own selfish motivations. Knowing what you know about him, how does that inform how you pray about a specific topic?

So how does this apply to apologetics? Let’s go back and use this prayer framework to think through a foundational apologetic topic:

Truth—Defined as the correspondence between thought and belief. Truth is telling it like it is. The world our kids are growing up in does not believe that objective truth exists. To them everything is relative and based on subjective feelings. How does what we learn about God being truth and the objective grounding for all truth help us pray?

Praise: What are some attributes of God related to truth? He is truth, immutable, all things come from him and through him, he never changes, he is the source of wisdom which was with him in the foundation of the world, his word is reliable, he is our objective standard, etc.

Confession: What sins surrounding truth need to be confessed—personally, corporately, on whose behalf do we need to confess—ourselves, the church, others? Ask God to reveal the motivation, deception, lies behind the sins that come up against truth. Confess we have given into political correctness and not stood up for the truth out of fear, ignorance, lack of training.

Thanksgiving: What can we thank him for regarding truth? How has God already been at work to correct lies; what can he do based on his nature? We can know truth, know that scripture and reality corroborate each other, all truth is God’s, truth is revealed in scripture and in nature, truth cannot be changed by belief.

Intercession:  What is the root idol, lie, or philosophy at play? What are corresponding scriptures that address truth and deception? What can we pray FOR? What can we pray AGAINST? As instructed in II Corinthians 10:3-5, what strongholds do we need to pull down, what arguments, theories, reasonings do we need to refute? Intercede for these things and pray for protection against lies and ploys of the enemy.

Join me in this prayer inspired by the apologetic that objective truth exists:

I praise you Father for you are the way, the truth, and the life. You are eternal and never-changing. Your word is completely infallible and totally reliable. Truth can be known because you are Truth and you are a knowable God. You have already defeated the father of lies. 

Forgive me when I live like the world and act as if everything is relative. Nothing could be farther from the Truth. Forgive me for buying into the postmodern thought that what’s true for me does not have to be true for others. 

That I must be “politically correct” and not offend anyone with expressing what I believe and why. I confess that mankind, in our wickedness, has repressed and hindered the truth and made it inoperative. 

Lord I thank you that you are a personal God and Christianity is the only religion with a personal God. I thank you that I can share that truth unashamedly with the world and set their deceptive thought pattern free. 

Lord Jesus, let my children know, see, read, and believe that you are the Truth. Give them the confidence and courage to stand firm in their beliefs. Show me how to ground them in the facts that back up their faith, scientifically, historically, and philosophically. Lord we pray against the doctrines, theories, systems and practices that attack Your truth. Release colleges especially from relativism, anti-supernaturalism, secularism, and pluralism. 

Change the hearts of professors who profess atheism and agnosticism and intentionally prey on the faith of our Christian students. Convict Christian students to train themselves in the knowledge of what they believe and why they believe it. Empower them to be Your ambassadors demonstrating wisdom, knowledge, and character in all their words and ways. Open the eyes of those blinded by lies; turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in Jesus. Sanctify Christian students and staff by the truth; Your word is truth. We pray that as an act of worship, our students will “present their minds in service to the Lord.” 

Lord create in them through your Holy Spirit the desire to pursue truth and proclaim it unashamedly. Amen. 

So, ladies, as you study apologetics, take note when you see something that speaks to praise, confession, thanksgiving, and intercession. Let your apologetics training make your prayer life more specific and targeted.

It is my prayer for you that you will combine zeal with knowledge, let prayer and apologetics--working in tandem in the spiritual and the natural realm--tear down strongholds that would entangle our children and be victorious in the worldview wars.

Tune in next month as we discuss in more detail that “Truth Exists.” And don’t forget—for more resources for moms see the Mama Bear website at www.mambearapologetics.com.

 To learn more about the four steps of prayer visit www.momsinprayer.org. For resources and training for your high school and college kids, visit www.ratiochristi.org.

(To email Julie about Ratio Christi: julieloos@ratiochristi.org; to email her about Moms in Prayer: college@momsinprayer.org. To read her blogs on the Ratio Christi website go to: https://ratiochristi.org/boosters/blog.)

OK Lang Ba Mambara ng Argumento Na Laban sa Iyong Pananampalataya? || John Pesebre (Feb 22, 2018)

I don’t mean to incite a violent spirit pero tayong mga mananampalataya ay may spiritual blood na palaban like Paul in 2 Corinthians 10:4-5

The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds.We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

Naalala ko tuloy diyan yung Christian song na “Maintain” ni Jonathan McReynolds na may linya, “You gave me all the weapons, but it's still a fight.” At dito po sa verse na ito ang fight seems to be towards demolition of arguments and the seizing of the thought to be subject to Christ.

But before we get the wrong violent idea let me just emphasize that this act of demolition is for opening a door. Kumbaga, a person locks himself in a life using argument after argument that set themselves up against the knowledge of Christ. I do not want to leave you with the imagery na wasakan lang but actually opening a door by kicking it. You want to make it a point na kapag nag-aapologetics ka you want to keep a door opened doon sa nagre-resist sa knowledge of God. This is a God-given ministry as we shall see later on. Tandaan natin, in the words of AW Tozer, “Every ransomed man owes his salvation to the fact that during the days of his sinning God kept the door of mercy open by refusing to accept any of his evil acts as final.” The same goes with doubts and intellectual rebellion to God.

A few episodes ago we talked about positive apologetics. Last episode at ngayon at sa susunod pang araw we will talk about negative apologetics. Sabi Luke Nix tungkol sa distinctino ng positive at negative apologetics --

The positive case shows the evidence for the view we are defending, while the negative case shows the problems with the alternative being presented. Both are necessary in the overall case. The negative case is necessary because the adherent of the other view needs a logical reason to abandon their view for an alternative. The positive case is necessary because if an adherent is provided a logical reason to abandon their view, the other view being presented may not be the only option. The way that a view is shown to be incorrect is that its claims are put to the test against reality and reason. If the claims are found to not reflect reality or they are not logical, then the view is false. However, the claims of a view can be of (at least) two different types that require a different approach.*

Itutuloy natin sa episode na ito yung pagtuturo sa concept ng negative apologetics na refutation bilang tugon sa adversity na hinahatid sa atin ng ating kausap. By "refute" we mean yung pagpo-prove ng isang bagay na mali. We understand this to be a valid biblical case especially if we read sa 2 Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” focusing on the word “rebuke” according sa Louw-Nida Lexicon means, “to cause something to be or to become correct, with the implication of a previous condition of faults or failures - 'to correct, correcting faults.” Nagawa ito ni Paul kay Peter sa Galatians 2:11 where Paul “rebuked [Peter] to his face.”

But “rebuke” is oftentimes a word we use to fellow believers, pero I discussed rebuke because I wanted to indicate that opposing somebody is not always impious. In fact the apostles did it, Jesus always did it and believers must also do this to an argument that “sets itself up against the knowledge of God.” We will call this negative apologetics -- isang apologetic method kung saan either you are rebutting or undercutting an objection. This is one of the wings of rational engagement in apologetics -- the other being positive apologetics, which means marshaling a case for one's belief.

Sa positive apologetics, pinapaliwanag mo sa nagtatanong o nag oobject yung laman ng iyong pananampalataya, gina-ground mo siya sa proof bilang tugon sa kaniyang pagdududa o pagtatanong. In short ito yung “offering reasons for supposing that theism or Christian theism in particular is true.”†

Sa negative apologetics at yan yung nagde demolish ka ng arguments in the spirit of 2 Corinthians 10:5 “We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.”

Many people today, among them fellow Christians, think wrongly that to refute is always not fair game for Christians to do. First of all, self-refuting statement yan kasi nagre-refute yan; pangalawa, although there may be instances na hindi appropriate mag refute, yet it is not always the case.

I have heard time and time again Christians advising me to avoid refutations, to avoid undercutting and rebutting but do either two things sa pag engage sa mga objectors. Una, use piety as the foundation ng engagement. Kumbaga don’t argue but to love and build relationship muna; or pangalawa, just give evidence or build a case for the truth of Christianity, wag ka na mag refute kasi ang ginagawa mo lang is to make them feel wrong about their belief and you are just presenting Christianity as a permissible alternative. Sa ganang akin naman pareho namang tama ‘yan -- nagkakaproblema kung paghihiwalayin mo kasi kailangan mo talaga yan along with negative apologetics. Ang virtue at piety kailangan mo pareho sa positive at negative apologetics; ang positive apologetics naman is a method of rational engagement tulad ng negative apologetics. So while ang negative at positive are the two wings of the angel that you are, ang virtues naman ay ang feathers.

Moreover, ang isa sa mga objections against negative apologetics is that it makes a case lang that Christianity is permissible dahil ang negative apologetics daw does not reach yung proper foundation of Christian knowledge. We recognize this argument as permissible din kaso hindi natin sinasabi na adequate ang negative apologetics convince a person. Nor are we saying that positive apologetics is adequate din. Ultimately, the conviction to believe the truth claims ng ating pananampalataya ay work ng banal na Espiritu. It is to His bidding. Kaya dito we are proposing that the two wings by which a rational engagement in apologetics are the wings of positive and negative apologetics.

Ang di ko lang talaga maintindihan ay kung ano ang biblical foundation nung nagsasabi na pabayaan na lang ang mga objectors at doubters kasi trabaho naman daw ng Holy Spirit yan. That proposal would not sit well I assume at least to the apostle Paul na sa Acts 18: 4 tuwing Sabbath “reasoned in the synagogue, trying to persuade Jews and Greeks.” The word “reason” there is the word dielegeto na ang root word ay dialegomai at maririnig ninyo yung word na dialogue doon. Dielegeto, dialegomai – diyan galing ang word na dialogue. He didn't leave them alone -- in fact yung nature pa ng pakikipag dayalogo niya ay mangumbinsi, "trying to persuade Jews and Greeks." Leave them alone? I don't think so.

A good case for negative apologetics can be built from 2 Corinthians 10:5 kung saan ang language is very vivid, “We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.” The Greek word that Paul used here which was translated in many variations like “demolish”, “destroy,” “tear down,” “cast down” etc is actually a very graphic word in the original language and would probably come close to the destruction of physical structures like the Twin Towers in New York when both fell down. It was demolished. The word is used for destroying structures like barns and houses in the Greek. That is what we are told to do to ideas that oppose “speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God.” When you refute an objection, the admonition in 2 Corinthians is to do a job: a demolition job.

Contrary to many opinions ngayon lalo pa ng maraming believers, refutation is actually a biblical practice. Case in point yung good word na binigay ng book of Acts sa ginawa ni Apollos sa Acts 18:28 that says, “for he [Apollos] powerfully refuted the Jews in public, demonstrating by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.” While the Greek word for “refute” occurs only once in the New Testament, yet we can see its interrelation with our key verse kanina for the ministry of apologetics sa 2 Corintihans 10:5.

__________

*  Luke Nix, "The Difference Between What a View Asserts and Implies," in CrossExamined.org (website); available at https://crossexamined.org/difference-view-asserts-implies/

†  Michael Sudduth, “Reformed epistemology and Christian apologetics.” Religious Studies 39, 299-321 (2003) 

OK Lang Ba Makipagtalo sa Pananampalataya? Refutation and Negative Apologetics || John Pesebre (Feb 20, 2018)

This episode po I will give an introduction on the idea of refuting arguments in relation sa apologetics. Nakita ko po na marapat na pag usapan natin ito dahil hindi tayo gaanong sanay sa mga environment na may confrontation. Filipinos kasi are known to be uncomfortable with conflicts or confrontations. Diyan siguro nagsisimula ang problema natin malimit sa apologetics. Apologetics does not present itself as a long, quiet walk on a beautiful weekend morning, but it is in the weekdays category - work and overcoming crises.

Sa isang survey na na conduct ng NeedGod.ph kung saan itinanong nila “What scares you the most when sharing the Gospel?” Only 1% ng respondents ang nag-mention for their reason yung lack of knowledge in presenting the gospel. All 99% said something in the form of rejection or turning down or dismissal na dahilan kaya natatakot sila makipag usap sa mga tao about the Gospel. This is the typical Pinoy pysche in a social environment such as Gospel-sharing.

To some parang nakakatakot naman na ministry ito kasi parang nate-threaten yung iyong amor propio o yung feeling ng self-respect and worth. Ayon na rin ito sa Filipino values development guru na si Dr. Tomas Andres na nagsabi sa kanyang aklat na Negotiating with Filipino Values na ang amor propio stands as one dominant feature ng social life ng isang Pilipino. Oo nga naman, kapag may public engagement ka, ang malimit na concern is either you will win or lose. Pinoy na pinoy na concern yang mawalan ng amor propio.

Filipinos do not accept confrontations easily. Dagdag pa ni Andres na ang Pinoy daw ay magha-harbor ng “persecution complex” in the presence of conflicts (Andres, 8). Ayon sa isang author at lecturer ng Asian Studies,

In Philippine society, direct confrontation is generally avoided. Where a question prompts a negative answer, a negative answer is not given, but something less direct. Instead of saying that one cannot be present at a particular event to which he or she has been invited, one will answer, “I’ll try.” In this way, the one inviting is not offended or embarrassed and neither is the one who was invited.*

Ganyan tayo eh, huge on conflicts.

Bago niyo isipin na ako’y nakikipagtalo sa inyo, consider these words from a book I’m reading now on arguments --

If we lived in a perfect world, this book would be unnecessary for all of us would have everything we need and harmony would be universal. Yet even casual observation of simpler forms of life will show us controversy, creatures taking sides against one another: two opposing directions, perhaps the same colony, to to tug a beetle's carcass in opposing directions; Garfield the cat tricks Odie the dog out of a comfortable place to rest; one bird species drives another out of a desirable nestling or feeding area.†

Mas gusto sana natin na wala na lang pagtatalo. Dagdag pa din ng mga authors above,

Controversy is as old as humans; presumably, ancient peoples sometimes fought with words or fists over the last piece of mastodon meat, and they argued over whether to share with neighboring clans such valuable innovations as fire or the ability to shape flint into spear and arrow points.‡

Ang trick sa totoo lang is to turn confrontations into amiable conversations. Hindi ko sinasabi that we get rid of arguing, ngunit i-objectify natin o “to treat as an object or cause to have objective reality.” Ang isang nakikita ko ay ang translation natin ng argument na pakikipag-talo. Hindi natin maiiwasan makipagtalo. Siguro pangit ang idea ng makipagtalo sa Pinoy dahil it evokes competition. Maski pa palasak nating palitan ang word na "makipagtalo" with "makipagpanalo" hindi na kaila na ang idea natin ng argument ay pangit. Ika nga ng isa pang aklat,

To many, the word argument connotes anger and hostility, as when we say, "I just got in a huge argument with my roommate," or "My mother and I argue all the time." What we picture here is heated disagreement, rising pulse rates, and an urge to slam doors. Argument imagined as fight conjures images of shouting talk-show guests, name-calling letter writers, or fist-banging speakers. §

Tila baga sa atin pag may argument, may mainit na alitan. We have to re-evaluate this cultural set up ng Pinoy on "argument" and "argumentation."

Apologetics settles itself in the context of adversity. The basic definition of apologetics which is the “defense of the faith” suggests that there are objections, or questions, or doubts that put pressure on one’s faith -- be it coming from your own doubts or from other people’s. If one automatically runs away from these types of situations, then one has an unrealistic view of the facts of the Christian life. Sabi nga ni Queen Elinor kay Merida sa Disney-Pixar movie na Brave, "We can't just run away from who we are.”

Kaya siguro the mere mention of apologetics puts discomfort sa mga Christians kasi it might involve debates, refutations and argumentation na sa isang public setting ay maaring mag-result na mapahiya sila.

Oo may disadvantage na harapin ang confrontation kasi may stress siyang involved. However, maski maaring mangyari ang adversities (o kahirapan) sa mundo, kailangan nating harapin ang marami dito bilang mananampalataya and from there turn to a wider vision of God for the situation He puts us in. In doing so, facing these adversities gives breath to our understanding of the blessings of God in us. Parang si Apostle Paul na may adversity na “thorn in the flesh” sa 2 Corinthians 12 kung saan binanggit niya sa verse 8, “Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me” subalit hindi ito inalis ng Panginoon. Paul then faced that reality ng kanyang sitwasyon at nabigyan ito ng bagong kahulugan dahil sa tugon ng Diyos,

But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me. That is why, for Christ’s sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong. (2 Corinthians 12:9-10)

Apologetics allows facing adversities. This should not put a Christian to despair. There is another resolve when you face adversity that is exemplified by the Lord Jesus Himself. When He was agonizing in prayer at the Garden of Gethsemane because of his imminent crucifixion, He said “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me” (Luke 22:42a). That’s the adversity.  Jesus took another step, saying to the Father, “not my will, but yours be done” (Luke 22:42b).  Jesus knows that the very reason He was here in this world was to display divine action as divine grace from the Father to save His people. Likewise, believers like you and me, must take that extra step when when confronted with adversity. Jesus told us we will have them: “In this world you will have trouble” (John 16:33), but notice that this fact is sandwiched by two other facts, “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.” Yes papayag ka for certain adversities to settle up, however because you are a child of God, one who has received gracious divine actions to save you, you have a bigger vision than these adversities. Ganyan ang diskarte sa apologetics.

Itutuloy ko na lang po sa susunod na episode ang pagpapatuloy nito. Sana ay sumubaybay pa rin kayo. Kung nais ninyong ma-access ang manuscript ng episode na ito, punta lamang kayo sa FB page na Kaliwanagan Kay Kristo, paki like na din lang po para lumaki ang ating Kaliwanagan FB community.

__________

* Damon Woods, The Philippines: A Global Studies Handbook, 245.

† J. Karl Nicholas and James Nicholl, Effective Argument (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1991), 8.

‡ Ibid

§  John D. Ramage, John C. Bean and June Johnson, Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric With Readings (multiple places: Pearson Longman, 2004, 6th edition), 3.


PS

#neighborology VS SOUND DOCTRINE

Naalala ko last year nang may post na ganito ang #neighborology --

“It does not help that the popular way people nowadays know of speaking the truth is by proving others wrong."

Sabi naman ng Titus 1:9

“He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.”

Para bagang ang mag argue is prohibited sa Scripture.

Sabi ni Brian Chilton,

"the Bible presents several examples where people came to faith or were persuaded to faith by various argumentations. For instance, the miracles and teachings of Jesus provided a case for His claim to be Messiah. The miracles served as a sign. Why were such signs offered? Signs were provided to present an argument for the Messianic claims of Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus argues that “the works that the Father has given me to accomplish, the very works that I am doing, bear witness about me that the Father has sent me” (John 5:36). In addition, Jesus challenged His adversaries to “search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me” (John 5:39). Other examples could be offered such as Paul’s defense of the faith before various groups of people, including the Athenians. Consider Philip’s argumentation to the Ethiopian that Isaiah 53 referred to Jesus of Nazareth."

Pakikibahagi ng Apostol Sa Ating Pagtatanggol ng Ebanghelyo: Evangelism & Apologetics || John Pesebre (Feb 15 2018)

Itutuloy po natin ang ating discussion sa divine mandate ng apologetics. Today we will talk about a mandate we get from Philippians 1:7 “Matuwid na aking isipin ang gayon tungkol sa inyong lahat, sapagkat kayo'y nasa aking puso, yamang kayong lahat ay kabahagi ko sa biyaya, sa aking mga tanikala, at sa pagtatanggol at pagpapatunay sa ebanghelyo.”

We share in the ministry of the apostles when we do apologetics. That’s an interesting thought kasi tayong mga believers put a high premium in apostolic imitation. Sabi ni apostol Pablo, “Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1).

I think he learned this idea from Christ who said in John 20:21, “As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.” Etong process na ito na parang multi-level imitation nakita natin ang mas intricate na design sa 2 Timothy 2:2 “and what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also.” Ang Christianity ay pasahan kumbaga, na sinimulan ni Kristo. So kaya naman when we read 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” makikita natin na “partakers” tayo ng ministeryo ng mga apostol. Naipasa sa atin para maging partakers tayo din sa ginagawa niya.

The Greek word for “partakers” simply means, according sa Friberg Lexicon, “ one who takes part in something along with another fellow participant, partner.” The word in Philippians 1:7 is not a verb that suggests an admonition, but a common noun -- it is just describing who we are, na tayo ay, ayon sa salin ng Ang Biblia, “kabahagi sa biyaya, sa aking mga tanikala, at sa pagtatanggol at pagpapatunay sa ebanghelyo.”

Anong kinalaman ng apologetics dito? See that word sa Philippians 1:7 na “defence” o “pagtatanggol”?  Na nakikibahagi tayo daw diyan kay Apostle Paul?

Those are translations of the Greek word “apologia.”

Ang sinasabi niya ay ang four-fold na katangian ng paglilingkod for the sake of the gospel ay ang mga biyaya nito, ang mga tanikala nito, ang pagpapatunay nito at ang pag-a-apologia o pagde defend nito. It is quite interesting po di ba? May pagtatanggol din sa pagbabahagi ng ebanghelyo. We see this practiced by Paul in Galatians 2. He defended the Gospel against, “false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery” (v4). Pinagtanggol talaga nila kasi sabi sa verse 5 hindi daw sila nag “yield in submission even for a moment.” At ano ang purpose nila Pablo, “so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.” In other words huwag siyang mawala sa inyong isipan sa pamamagitan ng maling turo na binabahagi ng mga “false brothers.”

So hindi na po mahirap isipin siguro ito kapag ikaw ay malimit nagse-share ng ebanghelyo. Laging may opposition na mararanasan tayo. Ang problema nga lang sa mga Pilipino parang asiwa tayo sa mga context na may conflict tulad ng mga hindi sumasang-ayon sa pagpe-presenta mo ng ebanghelyo.

May pagtatanggol talaga in the presence of conflict. Sa isang napakagandang linya ng Christian song na “Maintain” ni Johathan McReynolds, may ganito, “You gave me all the weapons, but it's still a fight.” Totoo naman ito at least ayon sa Jude 3 “Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.” Sabi sa Lexicon ni Louw & Nida yung word na “contend” sa original Greek niya means, “exert intense effort on behalf of something.” In behalf of what sa verse na ito? In behalf po of the faith that is once and for all entrusted to the saints.

The Lord does not admonish us to contend for "a faith" or "the faith of your choice". The definite article "the" is used which means a specific faith is being discussed. What is it? Sometimes the word "faith" refers to our own attitude of trust, and sometimes it is used to refer to that truth into which we have placed our trust. It is in this second sense that Jude uses the term; "the faith" is God's truth; the gospel.*

Malinaw din dapat sa atin na ang mandato na pagbabahagi ng ebanghelyo ay bahagi ng ating calling bilang mga anak ng Diyos. Ang mahalaga pa nating makita diyan, ay ang pinapatungkulan ng “pagtatanggol.” Basahin po natin uli, “Matuwid na aking isipin ang gayon tungkol sa inyong lahat, sapagkat kayo'y nasa aking puso, yamang kayong lahat ay kabahagi ko sa biyaya, sa aking mga tanikala, at sa pagtatanggol at pagpapatunay sa ebanghelyo.” Makikita natin na oo kabahagi tayo sa biyaya, sa tanikla, sa pagtatanggol, at pagpapatunay -- at ang mga bagay na ito ay mga bagay that we share with the ministry of the apostles that was entrusted to us also.

So kung may pagpapahalaga tayo sa pagbabahagi ng ebanghelyo, mag pagpapahalaga tayo sa pagtatanggol nito against those who malign it or even simple curious lang of what it is but they have questions.

So marahil itatanong ninyo, “Kuya John, makikipag-argue ako pag ganyan.” Oo pero you have to do this intelligently. Next month I will share po sa inyo how to determine the argument nung kausap mo at paano ka rin sasagot using an argument. However next episode po, ang gagawin ko ay I will present muna a case for negative apologetics, o yung direct na pagre-refute sa kamalian ng iyong kausap. So next week po, we will use Scripture to embrace the conflict presented to us.

(C) Photo Credit
_____________
*   http://www.bible.ca/ef/expository-jude-3.htm

PS

"Paul was not content only to proclaim and expound the gospel. He also argued its truth and reasonableness, and defended it against misunderstanding and misrepresentation. ... We too in our day must include #apologetics in our evangelism. We need to anticipate people’s objections to the gospel, listen carefully to their problems, respond to them with due seriousness, and proclaim the gospel in such a way as to affirm God’s goodness and further his glory. Such dialogical preaching has a powerful apostolic precedent in this passage."

John R. W. Stott, "The Message of Romans: God’s Good News for the World, The Bible Speaks Today" (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001), 98.

Nag-Apologetics Ba Ang Mga Apostol? || John Pesebre || Kaliwanagan Kay Kristo (Feb 13 2018)

Last episode we talked about apologetics not only as divinely mandated by God Himself but also modeled by Him in His direct conversations with His people in the Old Testament and Jesus’ understanding of God in the New Testament. Today we will focus more specifically on the apostolic teaching, or yung tinuro ng ilan sa mga apostol na nagsulat ng salita ng Diyos sa Bagong Tipan. Hindi po ito exhaustive subalit ang akin pong panalangin ay maging sufficient na explanation ito to establish the apostolicity of the the practical doctrine of apologetics.

The Greek word where we get the word apologetics occurs nearly 20 times in the New Testament. It is not always used as a word to defend the faith, kasi it was used simply to refer sa isang pagtatanggol tulad sa Acts 22:1 - "Brethren and fathers, hear my defense [apologias] before you now.” You can find the word in Acts 25:16 - "To them I answered,`It is not the custom of the Romans to deliver any man to destruction before the accused meets the accusers face to face, and has opportunity to answer [apologias] for himself concerning the charge against him.'”

In other instances, the word is used related to a believer’s spiritual life. In 2 Corinthians 7:11 “For observe this very thing, that you sorrowed in a godly manner: What diligence it produced in you, what clearing [apologian] of yourselves, what indignation, what fear, what vehement desire, what zeal, what vindication! In all things you proved yourselves to be clear in this matter.”

Also, Philippians 1:7 "Even as it is meet for me to think this of you all, because I have you in my heart; inasmuch as both in my bonds, and in the defence [apologia] and confirmation of the gospel, ye all are partakers of my grace.” So while Philippians 1:16 we see clearly the apostle's Gospel ministry tied to apologetics "knowing that [Paul was] appointed for the defense [apologian] of the gospel” sa earlier na 1:7 we see that we partake of this ministry with the apostles. Sa susunod pong episode I will talk about Philippians 1:7.

So makikita natin na mayroon talagang mga pagkakataon na directly ginamit ang word na ito in relation sa Gospel. Kasama pa dito yung turo ng 1 Peter 3:15-16 --

But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.

Dito tayo mag focus sa verse na ito this episode. Ito ang tinaguriang charter verse ng apologetics galing sa Diyos. Ang charter ay isang kasulatan na ibinigay ng isang may authority.

Sa verses na ito mapapansin ninyo na mayroon ang mga believers na mandate or charter na maging handa na magpaliwanag bilang pagsagot just in case merong magtanong about our hope in Christ. The English phrase “to give an answer” or “to give a defense” if you notice sa list above is a translation from the Greek word apologian. Ganyan lang po kasimple. Direktang mandato o charter galing sa salita ng Diyos ang pagbibigay ng paliwanag.

Paliwanag ni Michael Ramsden,

Peter is quite clear: believing that Christ died so that we might be saved is not a superstition. Instead there is a reason for the hope that we have – there is a logic behind the Gospel – there are reasons that can be communicated and explained concerning the atonement. We must be ready to give an explanation, a defence, of why the Gospel is true.*

Notice dito na there is an idea to build from where you are. Kumbaga tulad na nasabi ko sa previous episodes, kung wala kang “hope that is in you” wala kang ipang-a-apologetics. So the verse is explaining that you build a positive case for why you believe what you believe, in the presence of a doubt, or an inquiry or an objection.

Ganito ang ginawa ni Pablo when he was in Areopagus. People asked him, and he answered by building a case for the God that he knows. Let’s read this masterful response ni Paul as he builds a case for the God of the universe,

Mga taga-Atenas, napapansin kong kayo'y lubos na napaka-relihiyoso sa maraming bagay. Sapagkat sa paglalakad ko sa lungsod at pagmamasid sa inyong mga sinasamba, nakakita ako ng isang dambana na may nakasulat, ‘Sa Diyos na hindi kilala.’ Ang Diyos na inyong sinasamba kahit hindi ninyo nakikilala ang siya kong ipinapahayag sa inyo. Ang Diyos na gumawa ng sanlibutan at lahat ng naririto ay ang Panginoon ng langit at ng lupa, at hindi naninirahan sa mga templong ginawa ng tao. Hindi rin siya nangangailangan ng anumang tulong o paglilingkod ng tao, sapagkat siya mismo ang nagbibigay ng buhay, hininga at lahat ng bagay sa sangkatauhan. Mula sa isang tao'y nilikha niya ang lahat ng lahi sa buong mundo. Itinakda niya sa simula't simula pa ang kani-kanilang panahon at hangganan. Ginawa niya iyon upang hanapin nila ang Diyos; baka sakaling sa kanilang paghahanap, siya ay matagpuan nila. Ang totoo, hindi naman siya talagang malayo sa bawat isa sa atin; sapagkat, ‘Nakasalalay sa kanya ang ating buhay, pagkilos at pagkatao.’ Tulad ng sinabi ng ilan sa inyong mga makata, ‘Tayo nga'y mga anak niya.’  Sapagkat tayo'y mga anak ng Diyos, huwag nating akalain na ang kanyang pagka-Diyos ay mailalarawan ng ginto, pilak, o bato na pawang likha ng isip at gawa ng kamay ng tao.  Sa mga nagdaang panahon ay pinalampas ng Diyos ang di pagkakilala sa kanya ng mga tao, ngunit ngayon ay iniuutos niya sa lahat ng tao sa bawat lugar na magsisi't talikuran ang kanilang masamang pamumuhay. Sapagkat itinakda na niya ang araw ng paghuhukom sa sanlibutan, at ito'y buong katarungan niyang gagawin sa pamamagitan ng isang tao na kanyang hinirang. Pinatunayan niya ito sa lahat nang muli niyang binuhay ang taong iyon.

So ganito po ang positive apologetics. It is marshalling a case for the Christian faith. May nagtatanong and you build a case for God. Ipapaliwanag mo yung pinaniniwalaan mo na may katiyakan at commitment. Kaya napakahalaga ng mga pag-aaral natin ng salita ng Diyos at pagsasanay sa simbahan para tayo ay ma equip sa doctrines of the faith. Dahil dito sa presentation na ito ni Pablo ng kaniyang pag asa sa Diyos, ito ang sumunod na nangyari sa verses na yan,

Nang marinig nila ang sinabi ni Pablo tungkol sa muling pagkabuhay, tinuya siya ng ilan. Sinabi naman ng iba, “Nais naming mapakinggan kang muli tungkol dito.” At iniwan ni Pablo ang mga tao. May ilang sumama sa kanya at sumampalataya sa Diyos. Kabilang dito sina Dionisio na kaanib ng kapulungan ng Areopago, isang babaing nagngangalang Damaris, at mga iba pa.” 

When you defend the faith by building a case for it, nagkakaroon ng pagkakataon na sumang-ayon at tumalima sa sinasabi natin.

Sa mga nakaraang episode po kung saan nailatag ko ang witness ng early church sa apologetics, sa divine model at example at ngayon sa apostolic mandate and example, maski po hindi ito gaanong ka-extensive, I hope na kayo po ay nahikayat ko na tumalima sa panawagang mag apologetics. Subalit hindi pa po ako nagtatapos.

__________
*  Michael Ramsden, "The Biblical Mandate of Apologetics," in BeThinking.org (website); available at https://www.bethinking.org/apologetics/the-biblical-mandate-for-apologetics

'Di Lang Inutos ng Diyos Mag-Apologetics, Ginawa Pa Niya! || John Pesebre || Kaliwanagan Kay Kristo (Feb 8 2018)

I do not intend to exaggerate when I say that every believer must be engaged in apologetics. I will give you the best reason why. I will present not only a divine mandate but also a divine example -- yes, God not only commanding apologetics but Himself doing apologetics. What I am saying is what was said more emphatically by RC Sproul, 

By divine example and divine command apologetics is a mandate God gives to His people. If God Himself provides evidence for what He declares to be truth it is calumnous to repudiate the value of evidence. If God commands us to do the work of apologetics it is disobedience to refuse the task.*

So in this episode magpe present po ako ng combination po ng divine model at divine mandate. Mga models and mandate po ito na explicit po sa Bible na sinabi at ginawa ng Panginoon.

Hindi invention ng Christianity ang apologetics nung panahon nila. It was already a practice by civil society even way before the first century. Ang non-religious at classical notion ng apologetics ay may legal-forensic na idea. The Greek word is "apologia." It is used sa mga courtrooms. Sabi ni Kenneth Boa and Robert Bowman sa kanilang aklat na Faith Has Its Reasons: An Integrative Approach in Defending Christianity, 

In ancient Athens it referred to a defense made in the courtroom as part of the normal  judicial procedure. After the accusation, the defendant was allowed to refute the charges with a defense or reply (apologia). The accused would attempt to “speak away” (apo—away, logia—speech) the accusation. The classic example of such an apologia was Socrates’ defense against the charge of preaching strange gods, a defense retold by his most famous pupil, Plato, in a dialogue called The Apology (in Greek, hē apologia).†

Sa notion na ganito na nagte-testify to something maaari tayong magsimula sa example at mandato galing kay sa ating Panginoon. 

Apologetics is simply giving a reasoned defense, a testimony to the truth of the matter. Jesus understands this about the Father. Sa kaniyang pagkaunawa the Father is a testifying God. Divine testimony in the Old Testament, “refers to the revelatory self-witness of God to his people.”‡  Kaya naman sa isang pagkakataon sa kaniyang apologetics He appealed to the testimony of or “self-witness of God” the Father bilang pagtatanggol sa kaniyang misyon. Tugon niya sa mga Jews sa John 5:31-36  --

If I alone bear witness of Myself, My testimony is not true. There is another who bears witness of Me; and I know that the testimony which He bears of Me is true. . . . But the witness which I have is greater than that of John; for the works which the Father has given Me to accomplish, the very works that I do, bear witness of Me, that the Father has sent Me."

And the next sentence says it all, “And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me” (v37). The English Standard Version and many versions of this, interchange “testimony” and “witness” for the same Greek root word that occurs 76 times in the NT and which means according to the Friberg lexicon as a "declaration of ascertainable facts based on firsthand knowledge or experience bear witness to, declare, confirm.” The point of Christ is clear: the Father Himself testified for him. Ayon sa aklat na Classical Apologetics ni Sproul et al,

Jesus [here] follows the Old Testament rule of the corroboration of testimony by at least two witnesses, and shrinks from any claim of self-attestation. The principle is clear: “If I alone bear witness of Myself, My testimony is not true.” Far from verification, Jesus declares that singular self-attestation does not verify, it falsifies.§

Ang classic example natin ng divine example at mandate sa Old Testament is in what is believed to be the oldest book of the Bible, ang book of Job.

Sa isang nakakalulang karanasan para kay Job, sinukat ng Panginoon ang kakayanang mag-reason ni Job by asking him questions na parang nangungutya, "Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Dress for action like a man; I will question you, and you make it known to me” (38:1). Inulit nya ito sa 40:6, “Dress for action like a man; I will question you, and you make it known to me. Will you even put me in the wrong? Will you condemn me that you may be in the right? Have you an arm like God, and can you thunder with a voice like his?” God then concluded ang kaniyang litanya ng patunay kay Job with, “Shall a faultfinder contend with the Almighty? He who argues with God, let him answer it.” Sa totoo lang nakaka-awa din si Job, yet what an experience for a man to hear God Himself give a reasoned prosecution para magbigay ng katuwiran si Job.

Frazzled and -- ano nga yung usong word ngayon? -- shookt, Job replied, “I have uttered what I did not understand, things too wonderful for me, which I did not know” (24:3). God had provided incontrovertible reason to Job na hindi lang naman gustong pagalitan ng Panginoon pero gusto Niya ring makumbinsi.

This idea of reasoned persuasion or makatuwirang  pangungumbinsi characterizes the divine example and mandate  in apologetics. God demands to be engaged in an exchange of persuasive reason. In Isaiah He instructs the poor prophet, “Come now, and let us reason together” (1:18). The word translated as “let us reason” in the Hebrew is a cohortative imperfect verb. What cohortative means is may pakiusap o admonition; at ang imperfect ay tila baga patuloy na gawin. So sa simpleng salitang kanto ay parang si Kuya Boy Abunda na “Tara usap tayo.” 

In the book of Isaiah this frequent appeal na "usap tayo" will be a cardinal feature in God's dialogue with the prophet. At one point God invites disputation. In 41:21,  “Present your case,” the Lord says." The Hebrew for this "case" is "disputation" or "strife." In a manner of speaking, para siyang si Michael Buffer na "Let's get ready to rumble."

Sproul et al explains of 41:21,

The God of Israel [here] presents His case, providing myriads of demonstrative evidential works and future prophecies which vindicate His claim as a truth-teller. He gave a sign to Gideon on the fleece (Judg. 6:30-40), and a sign to Moses and the court magicians by a staff (Exod. 4). Moses saw the leprous hand and the burning bush, both attesting to the divine claim. To Pharaoh and the people of Egypt were given the plagues, culminating in the Nile’s becoming a river of blood and the firstborn children a sign of judgment.║

Isa pa siguro sa mga paraan kung paano natin ito makita ‘yung nakitang testifying God ni Kristo sa Ama is to look at Exodus 25:16 “And you [Moses] shall put into the ark the testimony that I shall give you.” Ang Hebrew word na translated “testimony” dito ay ginagamit din na word as “witness testimony”  o pagtetestigo. Hindi si Moses ang testigo or bearer of the witness kundi ang Diyos at itong testimony na ito ay ibibigay nya kay Moses. Magandang ganyan din natin maunawaan kung bakit alam ni Moses ang mga libong taon bago siya pinanganak. Ang tinutukoy ko ay yung pag create ng mundo, sila Cain at Abel, kay Abraham at marami pang iba. Dahil ito sa paglalahad ng Diyos, bilang testigo sa mga nangyari. Isa din kasi ito sa mga patunay na ang Kasulatan ay nararapat lamang na galing sa Diyos mismo dahil, ayon na rin isang manunulat, 

Ito’y may kalagayang mula pa sa sinaunang kasaysayan. Ang Bibliya’y mistulang uban na nagaantanda ng karunungan, sapat upang maging kagalang-galang. Walang buháy na kasaysayan ang higit na nauna pa sa talá ni Noah: subalit ang Bibliya’y naglalahad ng mga katotohanang mula pa sa umpisa. Ito ang tiyak na panuntunan ni Tertullian: ‘Yaong mula pa sa pinaka dakilang sinauna, id verum quod primum, ang siyang dapat tanggapin bilang pinaka natatangi at tumanggap ng pagsamba.¶ 

We can see this testimony of “God Himself provides evidence for the claim that He is the true God, displaying His divine credentials openly.”# Sa episode na ito we presented the divine mandate and example of apologetics.

From this limited divine examples, we will proceed to look into the apostolic mandate next episode. 

__________

* RC Sproul, John Gerstner and Arthur Lindsey, Classical Apologetics, 20

†  Boa & Bowman, Faith Has Its Reasons, 1.

‡  Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, sv "Testimony", accessed at https://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionaries/bakers-evangelical-dictionary/testimony.html

§ Sproul, Gerstner & Lindsey, 50

║ Sproul, Gerstner & Lindsey, 49

¶ Thomas Watson, Body of Divinity, Question 2; translated to Filipino by Alvin Tugbo.

# Sproul, Gerstner & Lindsey, 44

Nag-apologetics ba ang early church? || John Pesebre || Kaliwanagan Kay Kristo (Feb 6 2018)

The early church understood and practiced apologetics. Kaso nga lang, they did not practice this task early on. They did not knock on doors challenging everyone to a debate; but on the contrary, para ngang sila pa yung pinupuntahan at binu-bully simula nung magsimulang lumago ang simbahan. May kasabihan tayo na yung puno daw na hitik sa bunga, yun ang binabato. This is not surprising dahil according kay Jonathan Hill, author ng napakagandang aklat na What Has Christianity Ever Done for Us? where he said, “[W]hen Christianity . . . exists as a minority concern, it is well placed to act as a critical influence on the majority viewpoint.”* At nung napa epekto na ng Christianity ang influence, nagsimula na ang pambabato.

Ang minority status na simulain ng Christianity at ng Christian apologetics ay sinang-ayunan ng renowned church historian na si Robert Grant,

Apologetic literature emerges from minority groups that are trying to come to terms with the larger culture within which they live. Apologists do not completely identify themselves with the broader society, but they are not advocates of confrontations or revolution. They address their contemporaries with persuasion, looking for links between the outside world and their own group and thus modifying the development of both . . . As [the apologist] tries to present [Christian] ideas as persuasively as possible, the persuasion is likely to convert [people] . . . and modify their ideas at least in form. . . He is also defending the group against accusations spread by the majority about minorities, who are treated as responsible for social divisions or even various catastrophes that shake up society as a whole.†

Paliwanag naman ni Kenneth Boa & Robert Bowman sa kanilang aklat na Faith Has Its Reasons: An Integrative Approach to Defending Christianity, “the new challenges that confronted the burgeoning church as it spread throughout the Roman Empire required a new apologetic counterthrust.”‡

Etong “apologetic counterthrust” na ito ay makikita na rin natin sa mga “[a]pologetic literature” nung panahon na yon. Nangingibabaw dito ang pangalan ni Justin Martyr (AD 100-165). Sa kanyang panulat na Dialogue with Trypho the Jew he provided defense by utilizing passages pointing to Christ in the Hebrew Scriptures.

Ang isa pa na pangalan dito na mahalagang banggitin ay si Origen (AD 184-254). A century before his birth, Greek philosophers were beginning to resent Christianity not only because of its growing population but also its influence. One of these is the Platonic philosopher Celsus who

wrote a book entitled (presumably with a hint of sarcasm) True Doctrine, which represented a trenchant attack on what he regarded as these barbaric idiots who were twisting ancient and noble doctrines into a debased form, suitable only for the intellectually inadequate and socially inferior.§

Kumbaga mapagmataas na binabalahura ni Celsus ang mga believers. Nang mabasa ito ni Origen a century later, sinagot niya ito. What is fascinating sa apologetics ni Origen is he did not just defend Christianity from the vicious attacks of Celsus, he also exposed many faulty reasoning sa mga sinabi ng kanyang katunggali. Sa salitang kanto sa atin dito sa Pilipinas, niresbakan siya. Sa pag defend ni Origen gumamit siya ng positive apologetics, which is building a case for the truths found in Christianity.

Pero gumamit din siya ng negative apologetics o yung pag-e-expose ng faulty reasoning ng kaniyang katunggali. One time I was talking to an atheist at ang sabi niya, Christianity is a very violent religion kasi tayo daw ang nagpasimula ng mga madudugong giyera taking a cue from God commanding the Israelites to commit genocide on the Canaanites. I explained to him by way of positive apologetics that Christianity serves a god na ang nais ay magkaroon ng shalom at yung mga tinutugis niyang mga Canaanites were actually people who have no regard for righteousness and peace. Then I moved sa negative apologetics by saying na ang information at logic niya ay mali. Mali information nya kasi hindi genocide ang Canaanite dispersal at yung nagpasimula ng majority ng mga giyera ay pinapasinungalingan ng isang akademikong aklat na pinamagatang Encyclopedia of Wars ni Philips at Axelrod. Isa itong multi-volume na aklat na nag index ng lahat ng giyerang naganap sa recorded history at nakalagay pa doon kung ano ang cause ng war. Christianity has started less than 7%. Hindi yan majority.

Origen utilized ang positive at negative apologetics sa kaniyang  response to Celsus by building a case for Christianity (positive apologetics) and exposing the fallacious reasoning ni Celsus (negative apologetics).

I picked up these two stories from Origen and Justin Martyr from a host of other examples in the early church to provide for you a glimpse into the importance of apologetics in the lives of the early church. I am actually setting you up to the biblical mandate for apologetics. Magbibigay ng dahilan ang biblical mandate na ito kung bakit ganon na lang ang pagpapahalaga ng early church sa apologetics.

Where did the early church get the idea that they have to defend the faith? They got it from the apostolic teachings -- at yan po ang tatalakayin natin next episode. Sana po napagpala kayo today. Kung nais ninyong maka access.

__________
* Jonathan Hill, What Has Christianity Ever Done for Us?, 25.

†  Robert M. Grant, Greek Apologists of the Second Century, 9-10.

‡  Kenneth Boa and Robert Bowman, Faith Has Its Reasons: An Integrative Approach to Defending Christianity 14.

§ Hill, 25.

Ang Kaugnayan ng Ebanghelyo sa Apologetics: Gospel Foundation | John Pesebre | Kaliwanagan Kay Kristo (Feb 1 2018 Episode)

In this month’s episode magpo provide po tayo ng theological foundations ng Christian apologetics. Aside from its task as biblically mandated, apologetics has a biblical design that moves from motive to a ministry output in participating with God's redemptive story. Eto po ang gagawin nating outline for the month: mandate, motive at ministry. After laying those necessary foundations, apologetics must have a curriculum and a parallel process of not only learning how to build one’s faith from objections but also how to engage objectors. That we will do next month. Sana po ay wag kayong magsasawang makinig at samahan ako.

When we talk about "task", we talk about “a clearly defined piece of work.” It derives from the Latin word "taxare" which means a “charge” (the early sense of the word is “to impose a tax on”). A task can either be self-imposed by sense of necessity or obligation or given by somebody outside yourself -- either someone you esteem or someone in authority. When we use the phrase “task of apologetics” here we mean it in the sense that somebody gave the Christian that task. RC Sproul comments that this task “rests upon a biblical command. We find a mandate in Scripture to defend the faith, a mandate that every Christian must take seriously.”* One can downplay or even disregard apologetics like many Christian these days. But once you claim a justified belief or a knowledge of truth, you will always do apologetics as a response to those who will question it or even malign it. And we have seen that in the church's long history when there has never been a shortage of militancy against the cherished truth of the Christian faith by people outside her. The saints of the early church would use reason to refute and to persuade in the hope of producing new beliefs to their listeners. The application of these truths was attested with their very lives. Some have lost their lives doing so carried out by murderous tyrants or angry mobs. You might call them stupid or time wasters but you must recognize the urgency of the message: every Christian must take apologetics seriously.

However, may importante po akong sasabihin. Ang task ng apologetics ay built upon sa magandang balita na natanggap at pinanampalatayanan ng anak ng Diyos. What do I mean by that?

Bago pa man makita natin na ang apologetics ay isang tungkulin ng isang anak ng Diyos, kailangan maunang malaman natin na ito ay isang tungkuling naipanganak dahil sa ebanghelyo. Bakit ika ninyo? Pansinin natin ang charter text ng apologetics sa New Testament, ang 1 Peter 3:15 -- “But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:” Yes may task na binigay diyan, at yan yung “sanctify the Lord in your hearts” at “always be prepared to give an answer” kaso lang bago mo gawin yang mga ‘yan, ano ang mayroon ka na? Ang sabi diyan ay “hope that is in you.” Ano yung hope na yun? Nasa chapter 1 verse 3, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.” The hope is in the Gospel, that is Jesus Christ in you the hope of glory (Col 1:27).

So before we go into the demands of apologetics, the duties of apologetics, or however lawful terms you might want to put it, this task emerges out of the Gospel. It didn’t emerge out of a legal duty for Christian, but on what Christ has done to you. You do duties because Christ has done His duty. Christian duties are not currencies for God’s favor. Christians are favored by God because of the treasures of Christ imputed to them. The DO emerges out of the DONE. Our Christian imperatives are contingent upon Gospel indicatives.

Mahalagang ma-distinguish ang “indicative” at “imperative.” Mga categories po ‘yan na natutunan natin sa basic English nung elementary pa tayo. Ang indicative sentence ay isang simpleng paglalahad; samantalang ang imperative ay isang pangungusap na nag uutos; (at kung gusto nyo pa ng totoong English review, ang interrogative sentence naman ay nagtatanong -- subalit hindi natin pag uusapan dito ang interrogative: yung indicative lang at imperative.)

Ang halimbawa ng indicative sentence ay “Christ died on the cross.” Naglalahad po siya. Ang imperative naman ay, “Go and sin no more” -- nag uutos siya. Paul gave an indicative statement concerning the Gospel sa 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 “Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures.” Ang example naman ng imperative kay Paul ay sa 1 Corinthian 16:13-14 “Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love.”

Ang Gospel po ay nasa indicative, hindi imperative. Kasi kung naka imperative ang Gospel, hindi na yon Gospel, but a Law. Ang Magandang Balita ay isang balitang nilalahad, preached, hindi ito iinuutos. Ang ebanghelyo na pundasyon ng ating bagong buhay ay isang paglalahad. Sabi ni J. Hampton Keathly, “In short, ‘the Gospel’ is the sum total of the saving truth as God has communicated it to lost humanity as it is revealed in the person of His Son and in the Holy Scriptures, the Bible.”†

Dagdag pa ng isa sa pinakapaborito kong Christian theologians na si Michael Horton,

the pattern of the New Testament is consistent: First the indicative, followed by the imperative. It is not only followed by Paul in his epistles. For instance, Peter first tells believers that they are living stones being built up into Christ's temple, chosen and holy because of their union with Christ (the indicative). Only then does he say, "Dear friends, I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world, to abstain from sinful desires, which war against your soul" (1 Pet. 2:11). Those who reverse this order will be forever enrolled in programs and strategies for reaching "the victorious life" and the "filling of the Spirit," because they believe that the promise is held out on condition of fulfilling certain conditions or obeying certain commands, whether "surrendering," "yielding," "letting go and letting God," or any number of approaches. Paul's entire argument in Romans six rests on the fact that something has already happened. He does not say, "If you yield your body to righteousness, you will die to sin," but rather, "For we know that our old self was crucified with him" (v.6). He does not say, "Make sure that sin does not master you," as many believe that sin can master a so-called "carnal" Christian. Rather, he states, "For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace" (v.14). . . The objective determines the subjective, the divine announcement of what has already been done for and to the believer in Christ dictates the Christian life.‡

A task is a duty to be carried out and set to us by a command or a law. Apologetics is not the Gospel, it is a task. But it has to be built upon the Gospel for the Christian -- “be prepared to give an answer to the hope that is in you.” Kung walang “hope that is in you” wala kang ia-apologetics. Hindi ka magtatanggol kung wala kang ipagtatanggol. Sa kasabihang Pinoy, “Wala kang madudukot, kung walang nakasuksok.”

The beauty of apologetics as a task or duty built upon the Gospel is that it is also a privilege. To explain to people the grandeur of God in creation, salvation, and providence, is already a thing of joy. But to be commissioned by God Himself to tell those things about Him and to help people see the Gospel and believe it, makes this, your commission as the Great Commission.

(C) Photo Credit

__________

* RC Sproul, Defending Your Faith,1.

† J. Hampton Keathley, "What is the Gospel?" in Bible.org (website); accessed at https://bible.org/article/what-gospel.

‡ Michael Horton, "The Indicative and The Imperative A Reformation View of Sanctification," in Monergism.com (website); accessed at  https://www.monergism.com/indicative-and-imperative-reformation-view-sanctification.