John: An Apologetics Bible Study

Introduction

* What is Apologetics?

Explaining or making a case for why we believe what we believe; why the Christian Worldview is true and best represents reality. It incorporates four functions or modes:

(1) proves/ vindicates (developing a positive case for Christianity as a belief system using scientific and historical evidence and philosophical arguments, showing it to be reasonable);

(2) defends (against other belief systems by clarifying the CWV, answering objections, criticisms or questions, clearing away intellectual obstacles and showing that CWV is credible or not unreasonable);

(3) refutes (opposing beliefs, answering arguments non-Christians have in support of their beliefs); and persuades (convincing people that CWV is true or at least that it is reasonable to believe it is true; &

(4) persuades (convincing people that CWV is true or at least that it is reasonable to believe it is true, and persuading them to apply the truth of the CWV to their life, to commit their lives to Jesus and not just accept truth claims about Jesus). (For more see What Is Apologetics? By Multiple Authors. Faith Has It’s Reasons. www.bible.org)

So, this is my inductive and apologetic Bible Study of the book of John. My goal is to not only explain and interpret the Biblical text but also present arguments for and against, comparisons and contrasts with other systems or views and address objections. In short, I will attempt to make a case (apologetic) for what the Bible itself claims and for my interpretation of what it claims. I am using a pre-modern, historical-grammatical, classical dispensational hermeneutic with a verbal plenary theory of inspiration. This study is for the Christian and the non-Christian. I will use the tools of philosophy, hermeneutics, theology and apologetics.

* Why Is This Important?

Theology method and hermeneutics both build on the foundation of the elementary laws of logic. “The apostle Peter warns against those who misinterpret the Scriptures. He attributes their spurious teachings in part to the fact that they are “ignorant” (2 Peter 3:16). Timothy is told to “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15). There is no shortcut to proper biblical interpretation; we are constrained to study.”

The different philosophies and methodologies result in the various systems, views, and theories in Christian Theology.

See An Argument for A New Reformation at Worldview Cafe- https://sites.google.com/site/worldviewcafe where I discuss questions such as :

How does one interpret and apply the Bible correctly? Are there different types of Biblical hermeneutics? What if there is a conflict in interpretation? What are some hazards to avoid? Why can a text or passage have different interpretations? Should Bible teachers/ pastors address them? What happens if they don’t'? What is the difference between a principle and it's application? What are the types of implications from a text? What are some of the logical fallacies that Bible teachers and students make? How do we make sure we have the correct interpretation and application? Why does a Text or Passage of the Bible Have Different Interpretations? And what is the result? Why are there different translations? What is textual criticism? What are essentials and non-essentials? Why are there different interpretations, views and theories in Christianity?

In my experience most churches, pastors and Bible teachers don't really understand the audience they are trying to reach. Many teachers simply comment, summarize, define, or interpret what the Bible says without actually building a case or arguing for their claims, interpretations or positions. They do not attempt to convince their audience of their view. Considering our current post-modern culture and the barriers to truth and the Bible, unless the teacher argues convincingly, their audience may simply reject their judgments or claims as personal preferences or just another view among many. From their perspective, why should a non-Christian go to church if they do not believe in God or in Jesus? What would motivate them to go?

Moreover, Bible teachers / pastors usually assume that their audience unequivocally accepts the following to be true:

1) Truth is absolute and objective, having its basis in God, and is acquired primarily through general (universe) and special revelation (Bible).

2) God exists, is one triune being-- existing as three different persons (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) all being fully God and equal-- and is the Creator of the universe.

3) Jesus is a historical person, the Messiah/ Christ, fully God and fully Man, died and rose again.

4) The Bible is God's written word to man and is historically accurate, reliable and irrefutable.

5) All people are sinners and are headed for judgment.

Pastors/ Bible teachers seem to assume that their audience will simply accept their claims, position or interpretation and they can make false assumptions about what their audience knows about the Bible or particular passage and take for granted that everyone who goes to church grew up in a Christian home. However, there are people in their audience who are non-Christians, atheists, agnostics, skeptics; new Christians who do not know much beyond the basics of the Gospel; Christians who have an advanced knowledge of theology, and people who are from different religions and cultures.

Nevertheless, pastors and Bible teachers seem to assume that their audience will simply accept their claims, position or interpretation and they can make false assumptions about what their audience knows about the Bible or particular passage and take for granted that everyone who goes to church grew up in a Christian home. However, there are people in their audience who are non-Christians, atheists, agnostics, skeptics; new Christians who do not know much beyond the basics of the Gospel; Christians who have an advanced knowledge of theology, and people who are from different religions and cultures. Not everyone listening is interested, sympathetic, or neutral. Some could be hostile to the views or truth being presented. People today expect more from a teacher than just the assertion of their a position or judgment. They want good reasons and support. The teacher should consider the intellectual, emotional or volitional reasons his or her audience might have for rejecting the view or claim. They need to establish credibility with their audience if they want to be listen to in this post-modern culture, anticipate opposing positions, questions and objections and accommodate or refute them. I have found that pastors/ Bible teachers generally do not even attempt to present opposing arguments or address the most common objections or questions that their audience could have. If we disagree with someone's position or view we must not only give reasons for why their view is wrong (their facts or their interpretation of them) but also offer support as to why our view is correct. Forevermore, many pastors assume that a person will be saved if they only hear or become aware of the Gospel. It's time for pastors to not just teach the Bible but argue for what it claims and to minimize assumptions, if they really want to reach and influence the current post-modern culture.

There are a few approaches pastors and Bible teachers can use to deal with the different interpretations, systems and views in Christianity. In my experience, most do not mention them, probably because of lack of time or because they see them a irrelevant to “preaching the Gospel” or to a sermon. Others will instead focus on their own interpretation or view and not give support for it as we have seen. However, few will offer support for their interpretation or view but they will not go further. And very few will mention the differences or variations and argue for and against them (this approach is the one that I am advocating for). What happens if pastors and teachers do not address or mention these alternate views? Most people will become so comfortable with their one view that they will not be open to any alternate views when they encounter them. We can become so invested on our personal beliefs that we reject any other; take for example, the Doctrine of Election (see https://bible.org/seriespage/session-2-predestination-part-1-defense-unconditional-election). So, my mission with this study is to address the seekers, critics and skeptics of the book of John by minimizing assumptions, answering common questions and objections and noting differences in views when they are present.