Faith Isn’t the F-Word Here…

Recently, I came across an article from Relevant entitled “Christianity’s New F-Word” by Sungyak Kim. What caught my eye was the teaser: “All this learning how to defend Christianity seems to have left us uncomfortable with one very basic word.” Being in an apologetics ministry, I was drawn into reading the piece.

Kim offered a critique on the growing popularity of Christian apologetics, and raised concerned over what he perceived to be mainstream apologists attempts to answer every “prate and twaddle” coming their way. In doing this, Kim finds popular Christian apologetics surrendering to “the culture’s definition of ‘rational,’ ‘reasonable,’ and ‘justified.’ ”

I can understand that apologetics cannot be sidetracked into trying to address every “prate and twaddle.” Instead of addressing key apologetic issues (e.g. origins of the universe, the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the reliability of the Bible), an apologist might get caught up in a debate over secondary issues. Yet, Kim finds the problem to be far more serious.

Kim believes that the apologist’s rational defense has then “injected Western thought and secular methods into the Church, replacing faithful teaching of Scripture with ‘reasonable’ analysis of the Bible as a historical text.”

Are apologists substituting genuine faith with secular reasoning? Is this possible? I can see how many Christians fail to think Christianly about things, and often reason no differently than secularist on matters. They might become ambiguous, affirming, or accommodating on discussing homosexuality in the public square as opposed to offer a well reasoned biblical response [1]. But on the question of whether or not mainstream apologetics as a whole has substituted genuine faith with secular reasoning, I would have to answer, “No.” The heart of apologetics is to give reasons for why one believes what one believes. It is about the transformation of thoughts so that the believer might have the mind of Christ (Rom. 12:1-2; 1 Cor. 2:14-16; 1 Pet. 3:15). It is more than just winning an argument.

The Christian apologist may in giving reason to believe integrate aspects of philosophy, science, art, and literature into the conversation, but this is not secularizing faith. It is rather a “taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:5).

“Scripture is clear,” writes Kim, “The righteous live by faith….But ‘faith,’ unfortunately, is becoming Christianity’s new F-word. More and more, apologists are succumbing to cultural norms. They trade ‘the mystery that has been hidden’ (1 Corinthians 2:7) with ‘human traditions and the elemental spiritual forces of this world’ (Colossians 2:8).” Moreover, he adds, “Our faith in Christ has to be greater than our faith in wisdom and reason, regardless of what label might be pinned on us.”

Kim’s solution is troubling. If he means to pit faith against reason, then the real F-word in this matter is “fideism”—the idea of having belief without any rational basis. This kind of blind faith is something foreign to a biblical worldview. Christianity is a faith based upon evidence. The very Gospel of the early church was the proclamation that Christ died upon the cross, was buried, and rose again on the third day, which was evidenced in the discovery of the empty tomb and the eyewitnesses to the resurrected Lord. (1 Cor. 15:3-11; Mark 16:1-8; Matt. 28:1-20; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-21:25). When it comes to believing without rational basis, the real F-word is not “faith;” rather, it is “fideism.”

Notes:

1. cf., for example, Joe Dallas, “When Vague is in Vogue,” Christian Research Journal, 35, 2 [2012]: 28-33.