From Apologetics to Holiness

Thought of the day:

I think the Church has now passed the time for focusing on apologetics in public discourse.

Why do I say that?

Imagine two men: First is a man who actively practices all sorts of ungodliness: voodoo, astrology, drunkenness, masturbation, contentiousness, slander, and so on. And he relishes it all like a glutton at a feast and shows no sign that he wants to stop. He neither fears God nor respects man. Second, next to him, is a man who generally avoids such practices and tries to take care of himself and his family–an average decent guy. But now imagine that the first man is actively trying to convince the second man to forget his reasons for taking care of himself and to instead join him in ungodliness.

With which of these two men would you primarily try to use a logical argument in order to lead them to better things?

Personally, I would not bet on logic going very far with the first man.

Apologetics is by nature a matter of logic. It is the art of rationally defending the truth with reason and rhetoric. It is the art of fighting lies.

The first man who loves pagan practices doesn’t care about your logic. He is driven by the desires of his flesh, not by his mind. The desires of the flesh are opposed to the desires of the mind. (See Rom. 7:22 ff.) The second man is different. The second man is being tempted, but he has not yet sold himself fully to gluttony. His battles are of the mind. He must respond to the lies being shot at him by the first man or else be taken down by them.

So apologetics are fitting to help the second man, to try to prevent him from falling to the level of the first man. But it’s mostly too late to use them for the first man.

While our society is very much a mixed bag, and we are surrounded by both types of men, what I perceive is that the rising majority of the younger generation is now of the first type, not the second type. For them, it is mostly too late to save them with logic.

They might not be so visibly pagan as my caricature of the first man, but the dominant worldview is one of gluttony and listening to the flesh rather than the mind. You can see the evidence of this by looking at how the secular powers have already adapted to it: Look at how politicians have learned to carry on debates. They know that you don’t win elections anymore by making nuanced, logical arguments, but by appealing to emotional reactions and catchy 1-liners, and sometimes by promising “free” financial perks. Also consider how young people especially (including my own generation) choose to spend most of their free time—the prescient 80’s book title “Amusing Ourselves to Death” comes to mind…. We crave entertainment even to the point that many of us are now willing to consume overtly-preached ungodliness in our movies, shows, and books, that we wouldn’t have tolerated 20 years ago.

“Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.” (Galatians 5)

In short, the new generation of our youth are more likely to be tempted more by invitations to voodoo and drugs and the stealthy influences of corrupt entertainment than they are by the academic-sounding voices of Richard Dawkins or his compatriots.

So how do you respond to the first kind of man? The unrepentant need to hear the law. But this kind of man doesn’t acknowledge God. If you preach God’s Word to him, he will laugh at you and mock you. It can be worth warning him anyway so that his blood is on his own hands (see Jer. 7:27 or Is. 6:9 ff.), but don’t expect him to hear.

“Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.” (Mat. 7)

How should the Church focus her public discourse with the youth today then if not with apologetics?

I think the answer is holiness.

Apologetics counter the issues of the second kind of man just as truth and reason under God are the antidote to lies. Similarly, holiness is the counter to the issues of the first kind of man just as abstaining from and ruling over the desires of the flesh in self-control is the antidote to the desires of the flesh.

More particularly, I think holiness is needed today for two reasons: For the sake of the fallen first kind of man in the public sphere, and also for the sake of those still inside the Church.

For the fallen man, he almost certainly won’t listen or turn from his ways until God lets him experience the suffering that he chose for himself. This was the case with Israel many times across her history before Christ (from wilderness wanderings to the time of the judges through to the Babylonian captivity; also see Ps. 78:33-34), and is repeated in Christ’s parable of the prodigal son (Luke 15). Paul follows the same expectation in his ruling regarding a sinner in the Corinthian church (1 Cor 5:5). But if, by God’s grace, suffering eventually wakes up this man to look for greener pastures, where will he find a pasture where the grass is actually greener? The Church must be different than the world and not be seen by it as a place that engages in the same kinds of gluttonous and dissipating activities so that the prodigal man can see it and know where to return home to his heavenly Father if he should repent.

For those still inside the Church, focusing on setting ourselves apart from the ways of the world and from its influences will do a much better job of protecting our own children than arguments will. By analogy, if you and your family are on a battlefield and there are fiery arrows flying about, and part of the field is thick with the arrows and part of the field is not, wouldn’t you want to stand your family over where the arrows are thin? It is much easier to defend yourself when you have less to defend against. (Obviously, you still need to train up your children in how to defend against the arrows, both so that they can handle the arrows that do still come their way and also so they can engage in the heavier part of the battle when they are more capable, but I’m talking here about home life and life within the Church. You need safe spaces for training before you subject children to the heavy stuff, and you never willingly choose or tolerate the arrows as acceptable even when you do need to charge into the fray.)

“Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. . . . I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. ‘Purge the evil person from among you.’” (1 Cor. 5:6 ff.)

“But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. They said to you, ‘In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions.’ It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit. But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life. And have mercy on those who doubt; save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh.” (Jude 17 ff.)

(Also see Titus 1:10 ff.)

What does holiness look like for us today? That’s a longer topic than can fit here, but we should take the above passages and related other ones in the New Testament seriously and apply them to ourselves. The summary is to love the Lord our God with all of ourselves, and our neighbor as ourselves. That means not loving the world or prioritizing the pleasures and entertainments of the world at the expense of prioritizing God or spending our time in service to our neighbors.

“Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world. And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever. . . .” (1 John 2)

“And everyone who thus hopes in him purifies himself as he is pure.” (1 John 3)

“Religion that is pure and undefiled before God the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.” (James 1)

Christians are to be in but not of the world.

What kind of entertainment do you consume? What voices do you surround yourself with? Whatever you surround yourself with and listen to, that is what will define your thoughts. What do you decorate your house with? (Or your yard with for Halloween?) Whom do you associate with and treat as your brother? How do you apply your free time? What does that communicate to others about who you are and what you love? Or to your own children?

“Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. What you have learned and received and heard and seen in me [Paul]—practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you.” (Phil. 4)

We should definitely stay rigorous in apologetics and always be prepared with a reason for the hope that is in us. (1. Pet. 3:15) I don’t want to seem as if I’m making a dichotomy between apologetics and holiness. But the more academic stuff of the mind must be built upon foundations of basic morality and holiness and Godly living—living in our baptisms to daily drown and kill the Old Adam and its lusts so that a new man can daily live before God in righteousness and purity forever. (See Luther’s Small Catechism on Baptism.)

Now, a word needs to be spoken about pietism and legalism also. I am not advocating legalism. But I have sadly spoken with many today who only think of intentionally practiced righteousness as effectively the same thing as legalism. They are not the same.

“If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations—’Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch’ (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh. If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth.” (Col. 2:20 ff.)

There are two opposite extremes that are both abuses of true Christian Godliness—one is to not care about practicing righteousness and holiness and setting oneself apart from the world, and the other is to care too much about the outward practice that it becomes Pharisaic legalism, which is also condemned. (See also Rom. 5.) I have seen friends grow up in well-meaning but legalistic households and be badly hurt or driven away from the faith by that as well.

The emphasis cannot be on the external manifestations of holiness, like “do not taste” or “do not touch” or “do not watch”, and so on. The emphasis cannot be simply on opposing bad practices or avoiding bad companions. It must be on the good that we love—the reason for holiness in the first place. And it must especially be on the fact that in Christ we are now freed from the letter of the law to instead live by the Spirit of the law (2 Cor. 3). Families must create fixed external rules for the sake of training up their children to learn the Spirit of the law, but the teaching and emphasis must be on that Spirit of the law, which fulfills all of God’s command, and which is to love Him above all and to love our neighbors as ourselves.

“And this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he has commanded us. Whoever keeps his commandments abides in God, and God in him. And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he has given us.” (1 John 3)

So that being said, where does that leave us?

Extending the earlier analogy, the Church was unprepared for the waves of arrows that rained down on us in past generations with lies against the reason for our hope. Those who survived have learned how to raise our shields of faith (Eph. 6:17) against them, thanks be to God. Sound arguments against these lies are in my observation much more consolidated and robust now in the Church’s public discourse than they were a few decades ago (at least in the Lutheran Church). We must still pass along that necessary armor, since there will always be more arrows until the battle is finished.

But now the battle has shifted. Now the arrows of academic arguments have thinned and the enemy soldiers are instead walking among us swinging their swords. My prayer is that we learn to teach our own youth how to resist that with the breastplate of righteousness (Eph. 6:14) sooner rather than later. Otherwise, we may be caught like a soldier raising his shield to the sky when there are no arrows, while the enemy calmly limps up behind us and stabs us in the kidneys.

Lord, have mercy on us. Come, Lord Jesus!

Posted originally at Unnatural Philosophy