| Dear Friends of Reasonable Faith,
We hope things are opening up for you where you live! We’re free to shop and dine out but still tend to stay pretty much to ourselves. Our Defenders class will probably begin to meet again in person only after the New Year.
| |
| Jan and I continue to record our Defenders lesson every week in my home office. Because there is no class discussion time, we are really moving rapidly through the material! After we finish the current Doctrine of Salvation, we have only Doctrine of the Church and Doctrine of the Last Things to finish out our third complete Defenders series—quite an accomplishment! This series will provide via YouTube a series of classes on Christian systematic theology which will rival the class offerings of any seminary.
| |
| Perhaps my most significant social media appearance this past month was my dialogue on Justin Brierley’s “Unbelievable” program with Gregory Boyd, a “progressive” Christian thinker, on the doctrine of the atonement. Our dialogue contrasted nicely the classic Reformation view with the “progressive” view that deplores what Greg calls “redemptive violence.” To his credit, Greg honestly admitted that he was unaware of many aspects of the history of the doctrine of the atonement, as well as the philosophical arguments, contained in my book Atonement and the Death of Christ.
| |
| I had a wonderful interview with Christian brothers and sisters from the West African nation of Angola. Since Angolans speak Portuguese, I urged them to start a Reasonable Faith chapter in Angola using all the translations we’ve developed for Brazil. To my surprise, the interviewers all spoke excellent English! When I asked how that happened to be, they told me that each one had pursued studies in England, at Liverpool, Leeds, and Aberdeen respectively, so that we were all graduates of British universities! They were so appreciative of my spending time with them and promise to follow up by starting a Reasonable Faith ministry in Angola.
| |
| I also enjoyed a stimulating dialogue on Stelman Smith Jr.’s podcast “The Unapologetic Apologists” with the talented, young Christian philosopher Josh Rasmussen on God’s aseity and abstract objects. Josh used to be a fairly committed Platonist who held that uncreated objects other than God exist, but it was evident in our dialogue that he has moved quite a distance from that view toward what I think to be a more theologically acceptable position.
| |
| Kevin Harris and I also recorded several more programs for our podcast “Reasonable Faith,” including a really interesting pair of programs on Jesus and socialism. More social media interviews are scheduled for this month.
| |
|
| Research and Writing Ministry
| |
| I’m so encouraged by my progress on my systematic philosophical theology! I continue to work on the first major topic, Doctrine of Scripture. As I shared last month, the key question to be dealt with is whether the Scriptures are a divinely inspired communication of God’s truth for us. This has taken me deep into the nature of biblical inspiration. I provide a fairly detailed analysis of the key text II Timothy 3.16: “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.”
| |
| The most notable feature of this verse is that it is not prophets or even the authors of Scripture who are said to be inspired but rather the Scriptures themselves. The Scriptures are said to be “God-breathed” (theopneustos), to proceed, as it were, “from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4.4). Commentator I. H. Marshall says, “The point of the adjective here is surely to emphasize the authority of the Scriptures as coming from God and to indicate that they have a divinely-intended purpose related to his plan of salvation.” The failure to distinguish between the inspiration of the authors and the inspiration of the Scriptures has been the source of endless confusion among theologians. There is nothing said in this verse about the means or mechanism of divine inspiration; only the end product is in view. Because the Scriptures are inspired, they are profitable for various purposes, both pedagogical and pastoral. In particular they are valuable for instruction in Christian doctrine (didaskalia, the technical term for the doctrinal formulation of Scripture).
| |
| The crucial property of Scripture that emerges clearly from its inspiration is the authority of Scripture. The Jewish Scriptures are taken to possess divine authority, and therefore the writers of the New Testament base their doctrine upon its teachings. The source of that authority is in turn Scripture’s inspiration by God. In some mysterious way God brought about the Scriptures with the result that they are God-breathed, and so are God’s Word to us.
| |
| II Timothy 3.16 has to do only with the Old Testament Scriptures, which were the Bible of the earliest Christians. Can we learn anything from Scripture about the New Testament Scriptures? I argue that we can. By the time I Timothy was written, the Jesus traditions and perhaps even Luke-Acts itself was regarded as Scripture. For the author provides as this justification for what he says: “For the Scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain,’ and, ‘The laborer deserves his wages’” (I Tim 5.17-18). The first of these scriptural quotations comes from Deuteronomy 25.4, but the second derives, not from the Old Testament, but is a verbatim quotation of Luke 10.7! One might try to peel off the second quotation as a non-scriptural addition, leaving the reference to Scripture to Deuteronomy 25.4 alone. But there is no linguistic basis to make such a differentiation, and we have early, extra-biblical examples of Jesus’ words being cited as Scripture in Epistle of Barnabas 4.14: “as it is written, ‘Many are called, but few are chosen’” (citing Mt 22.14) and II Clement 2.4: “Again another scripture says, ‘I came not to call the righteous, but sinners’” (citing Mk 2.17). In any case, what is undeniable is that for the author of I Timothy the second citation is invested with the same authority as the Old Testament. That points to Luke’s Gospel as his source.
| |
|  | Chester Beatty Papyrus, Papyrus 46
Earliest substantial NT manuscript.
Source: The Chester Beatty Library
|
| Moreover, at about the same time, Paul’s epistles were also being regarded as Scripture, as we see from II Peter 3.15-16: “So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.” The author is evidently aware of a collection of Pauline letters, one or some of which had been received by the churches to which II Peter is addressed. The author of II Peter places Paul’s letters on a par with the Old Testament Scriptures already mentioned in II Peter 1.20-21. Richard Bauckham, the foremost commentator on II Peter, comments, “The inclusion of Paul’s letters in this category certainly means they are regarded as inspired, authoritative writings (as v 15 in fact says), ranked alongside the OT and probably various other books, including other apostolic writings.”
| |
| So although we cannot tell exactly how early the Gospels and apostolic epistles were regarded as authoritative Scripture, we know that toward the end of the first century they evidently were so regarded. Thus, at a strikingly early date, the central books of the New Testament were being treated as Scripture on a par with the Jewish Scriptures. This is really amazing!
| |
| The fact that these writings are said to be inspired by God and therefore authoritative raises a number of important questions. I’ll share some of those in our next Update, Lord willing!
| |
| William Lane Craig Center
| |
I want to close by returning to an exciting new venture I broached in last month’s Update. At Reasonable Faith we’re thinking of ways in which the legacy of my work might continue even after I’m no longer active. For years people have suggested that Reasonable Faith should develop an online curriculum based on my work in philosophy, theology, and apologetics. I’ve resisted the idea because I want to support existing Christian educational institutions rather than compete with them by offering courses and certificates that have no academic value.
| |
But now we’ve hit upon a bold proposal that will allow us to do both. In a nutshell, the idea is to develop a wide-ranging curriculum of courses based on my work that could be taken for credit at an accredited Christian university or seminary and applied toward a degree from that institution. Courses would be developed at both the B.A. and M.A. levels, along with certificate courses for laymen who may not be interested in pursuing a degree.
| |
The Covid-19 pandemic has dramatically underscored the absolute necessity of Christian educational institutions’ offering remote learning via online classes if they wish to flourish in the future. So we believe that the time is truly ripe for such an online curriculum.
| |
It will cost Reasonable Faith around $120,000 per year for two years to have this online curriculum developed. So we need to raise these additional funds beyond our current budget. We hope to do this by increasing the size of our annual Matching Grant campaign in the hopes that it would draw in even more donations than before.
| |
Our campaign will begin October 15 and run through the end of the year. So I’m asking you to consider substantially increasing your giving to this fall’s campaign, perhaps even doubling your contribution. It will then be matched dollar for dollar up to $300,000.
| |
Even though I am in good health, I believe that this is an opportunity to create something now that will outlast me and continue to reap dividends for the Kingdom of God well into the future. We hope you share that vision with us and can contribute accordingly.
| |
Thank you for your generous support!
| |
| For Christ and His Kingdom,
| |
Dr Craig,
I would like to thank you plainly and simply thank you. Thank you for your work. Thank you for taking the time to spend lunch with my wife and I. Through you I have become a Christian.
I am writing with the joy of the Gospel in my heart. After our lunch I left with a realization that I had no good arguments against the Faith. This caused me to endure a difficult time of reflection. While I felt some hostility to Christianity, I could not ignore what I had promised myself, to pursue the truth wherever it led. his journey has now ended in the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.
When my wife and I returned [home] from Atlanta, I was in a state of confusion and torment. I had come to a point where I felt the need to make a decision on my soul. I was home alone and I was going to sit on the porch and read Church History in Plain Language by Bruce Shelley. I had just finished the Gospel of John and had completed all four, but something drew me to my bookshelf where I had put your gifts, one of which was Focus on Christ by John Stott. I don’t know exactly why but I reached for that book and sat outside and began to read. Nine pages in and I was floored.
I have struggled with the idea of Jesus for a long time, not understanding why we needed him, but what I read staggered me and threw me into a state of utter confusion. To quote the book:
| |
Apart from Jesus Christ, the chasm between God and us in impassable. By ourselves, in our human finitude and self-centered rebellion, we can neither know God nor reach him. The pathetic little bridges we build from our side all fall into the abyss. Only one bridge spans the otherwise unbridgeable gulf. It has been thrown across from the other side. It is Jesus Christ, God’s eternal Son, who entered our world, became a human being, lived our life, and then died our death, the death we deserved to die because of our sins.
| |
I stood up and paced around. The final piece had finally fallen into place, and I understood! The implications shook me to my core. I could no longer deny the Truth. [My wife] had just arrived home from errands, and I called her out and I told her what was happening. I then asked her to do something I had never asked before. I asked her to pray for me. We knelt our heads, and she prayed but did not say “Amen.” We sat in silence for perhaps a minute, and I thought: I want to commit myself to Christ. If I am going to think it, say it! And I did. I surrendered myself to the free gift, and it felt like a hole had opened in my mind and I could see the Truth. I crossed the bridge, Dr. Craig, a bridge of faith built with trestles of reason, and on the other side was Yahweh.
I was overjoyed. It all made sense. I then read from Genesis 1:1 and John 3:16 and prayed like I had never prayed before.
Jumping forward, I am pleased to tell you that I am following the Lord’s calling for me. I am enrolled in the fall semester for a BA in philosophy, and my beautiful wife is now pregnant with our first child. Through these difficult times the Lord is providing me with many gifts.
My friends and family tell me I will become a pastor one day. For now I wish to grow in the spirit of the Lord and understand his word. My intent is to join the world of ideas and fight to defend the spread the good news of the Gospel
You are a true believer and a gentleman, Dr. Craig. You have influenced millions, but you and Mrs. Craig took the time to sit with my wife and I and discuss difficult issues. That was truly a turning point for me as a thinker.
I must thank you again with a whole and fulfilled heart for you and your work; without it I am convinced that I would not have made it across the chasm.
God bless.
Sincerely,
C
| |
|
|
|
|
