Sometimes, giving pat answers to some of the most common apologetic questions students ask isn't satisfying.
"What is truth?" and "How can we know Christianity is the true religion?" are two questions that Dale Fincher, author of the newly released Living with Questions, frequently comes across in his ministry career.
Fincher is offering students a softer approach to apologetics, a reading that doesn't sound academic and that's more accessible to younger Christians and those seeking answers about Christianity.
"I really sensed there was this world out there that needed to wrestle with these questions and get honest with themselves [about] them," he said, according to Youth Specialties, which supports Christian youth workers across various denominations.
With an educational background in performing arts and philosophy of religion, Fincher travels with his wife Jonalyn Grace, speaking to thousands of students and youth workers using narrative apologetics, or what they call "giving sturdy answers for better souls."
Over 15 years into story telling and addressing common arguments in the church, Fincher doesn't believe Christians are living in as much of a postmodern culture as many say they do, at least not among their students.
"I find that students really want to know what the truth is," he said, arguing against many baby boomer authors who say the truth is dead and that it's all relative in this culture. "They're just confused about what truth is and I think if we clarify some of that confusion, they're a little more ready to accept it and go into it.
"What I think our kids are allergic to right now is some sort of dogmatism by just saying something is true because we said it's true, or that's the way we've always done it," Fincher noted.
Christian apologist Anthony Horvath and his brother Brian have started a new movement to fill in the gap that churches often leave when educating students on even basic Christian teachings and reasons for believing Christianity to be true. The brothers began a T-shirt line called Apologia315 to help students preserve and defend their own faith while also witnessing to others. T-shirts read "Did Jesus rise from the dead?" and "Why does God allow suffering?"
"While we hope that these T-shirts are a good first step, they'll work best when integrated into a church's whole educational program where Christian apologetics already is a critical component in the curriculum," said Brian Horvath in a statement. "Unfortunately, not enough churches have such a program."
But there aren't really any five-minute answers to the questions seekers and Christians have, Fincher indicated.
"It's just hard work," he said, describing the research an individual needs to do to get find answers.
Although Fincher’s new book gives students some answers to the difficult questions and youth workers tips on how to address the student who's asking, they're all just "breadcrumbs of truth" along the way of an individual trying to piece together an answer satisfying to their own soul.
"Don't put on the attitude that we know all the answers because we don't," said Fincher, addressing youth workers. "At the same time, [encourage] students that this is part of the journey of life and we're trying to get to the point where we're satisfied with an answer" and not to the answer that nobody can disprove.
Fincher reminds youth workers that all the burden isn't on them when it comes to answering the difficult questions. "Of course, kids are responsible too and I believe they can handle it."
RSS
DannyPoo -
You wrote "While I am glad to hear that the Holy Spirit has convicted you. I would be careful of using that as your "only reason" for believing in the Bible. There are also many other non-subjective ways to validate the bible. Such has it's Historically verifiable elements, fulfilled prophecies, etc."
It is God alone that makes it possible for us to believe.
Ephesians 2:8-9 "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast."
But you are now saying that there are parts which would stand on their own.That's not what you originally said.You said there would be nothing left.I know I'm being "nit-picky" here, but I think it's worth considering.I understand why the idea of God is anathema to you.After all, you are an atheist.Maybe we can just agree to disagree.Ultimately, it's not until we die that we are going to know for sure which one of us is correct.But it is fun to discuss ideas, and I appreciate your willingness to give me the time.Thanks!!
GoldenEagle: It is not an exception. The justification for the golden rule in Christianity is also because we said so (via "we say god exists, and we say god wants the golden rulel"). What I'm saying now is that if Christianity withered away, the parts that stand on their own have better justifications to keep them around.
Yes, but your position is that if you strip away everything in Christianity that is not "because we say so", there is nothing left.The "Golden Rule", whether it is inherently Christian or not, is a part of Christianity nonetheless.It would seem to be one exception to your rule.There may be others, as well.
Also, i didn't think you were being a jerk. I thought you were being clear and honest.
GoldenEagle: The Golden Rule is a part of Christianity, that is certainly true. But there is nothing about it that makes it inherently Christian. Or inherently any other religion, for that matter. In other words, the golden rule does not need god, or jesus, or muhammed, or Buddha, or Krishna, or anybody else to be a good subjective decision concerning morality. Just because Christianity has the golden rule in it, that doesn't make its other claims worth any more. You would find a sufficient basis for the golden rule if you weren't religious, and so Christianity cannot claim the rule as a unique contribution that makes Christianity worth keeping around.
That didn't sound right.I apologize.It sounded like I was being a jerk, and that is not what I intended.It is better if we keep our discussion on a friendly and congenial level.We can disagree without being disagreeable.
What about Christian teachings such as the "Golden Rule" and love your neighbor? Do these not contribute to living in community? Do they not carry the same idea of treating others with dignity? I do see your point about our starting point as Christians.I believe in treating people with respect and dignity partly because they are made in the image of God, a claim you flatly deny as an atheist.I guess I can see why you object to the idea of God as a starting point, but you talk as if Christianity has no redeeming value whatsoever, a claim that I flatly deny.
davidj: I'm talking about the objective consequences of our actions. As for an objective standard, that's easy. Survival is the objective standard. Whether human beings survive or not is an objective question. Morality that meets that standard will be likewise objectivet. How do human being survive? They do it in community. We are social animals. Can a community survive if its everyone for themselves, and there is no fairness and dignity? The answer is no.
Voila. An objective standard of fairness and dignity. Now compare Christianity. Christianity is completely subjective. Instead of understanding the universe in terms of the objective knowledge gained through science, Christianity makes all sorts of subjective assumptions to try to impose the existence of a god on said universe. So it uses subjectivity to make subjective decisions, because it focuses on a subjective god rather than the objective universe.
Note to Citizen:
To what consequences are you referring? You are appealing to a standard without support. So what if people are abused when they are not respected. Show me your objective standard that insists humans should be treated with dignity and respect. As has been pointed out, according to Humanism, we are nothing more than another branch in the evolutionary tree, oops, I forgot, the root to the evolutionary tree died with punctuated equilibrium.
Gratus,
While I am glad to hear that the Holy Spirit has convicted you. I would be careful of using that as your "only reason" for believing in the Bible. There are also many other non-subjective ways to validate the bible. Such has it's Historically verifiable elements, fulfilled prophecies, etc.
If I would tell a young person that the Bible, for me, is the Word of God and therefore and objective standard in my life, he may ask: Why do you say so? My answer should be: Because the Holy Spirit convinces me. Yes, it is still my opinion and belief, and this person may reject my belief as being wrong. And yes, I am certainly not infallible. But since I subjectively and fallibly believe the Bible to be God's Word and the objective, written standard of my life (and any one else's as well), I must act on this believe and obey it!
Brian and Anthony's Apologetics T-Shirts can be found at http://www.apologia315.com
I just think that his original statement about Christianity is unfair and untrue.The point about treating people with dignity because to do otherwise would have negative consequences can also be said of some of the teachings of Christianity, such as the "Golden Rule" and love thy neighbor.I will say this for citizen.I may not always agree with him,but he does make me think!!
Now that I think about it, that was probably not the most polite thing to say. Sometimes internet chats/messageboards/opinion boards, give a person the ability to say things in a way they would never say in person. I apologize for that.