21 Lessons for the 21st Century: Lesson 10

C.S. Lewis & Francis Schaeffer: Lessons ... from the Most Influential Apologists of Our Time | 1998 | Scott R. Burson & Jerry L. Walls

[logos]

10. Subversion by surprise

Lewis and Schaeffer did some of their best evangelistic and apologetic work with those who were resistant to a direct presentation of the gospel. Years of compassionate conversation and an attentive ear enabled Schaeffer to "smoke out" incongruities with remarkable finesse. Lewis, likewise, was adept at catching his audience with its guard down. One way he went about doing this was by turning the tables on the skeptic. Consider how he responded to the charge that Christianity is discredited by its similarity to other religions. Instead of seeing similar motifs as a strike against the faith, Lewis persuasively insisted that this is precisely what we ought to expect if God is really the Creator and Sustainer of the entire world. Lewis was exceptionally proficient at offering an angle of vision that shifted a negative charge into a positive proof. It is in these moments of surprise that many are most vulnerable to the truth.

Yet Lewis employed this subversive approach most effectively through his imaginative writings. In the sacrifice of Aslan we are moved by the depth of divine kenosis. In the transformation of the beastly Eustace we are repulsed by the stubborn, scaly quality of sin. In the battle between Ransom and Weston we are gripped by the epic struggle between good and evil. In each instance, the reader is subtly encountering the contours of Christianity whether it is consciously realized or not. Once the skeptic has touched, tasted and gazed upon the truth, the chance for a rational response is immeasurably increased.

Such an approach holds great promise in a day of widespread resistance to traditional, direct, rational appeals. As Christian apologists in a visually oriented culture, we must engage our audience by using concrete and captivating imagery and a whole array of imaginative means. As William Abraham has noted, "the use of narrative, allegory, drama, fantasy, poetry and the like, may prove extremely important in the articulation of the Christian faith and in opening up the heart and the mind to the depth and simplicity of the gospel. ...Lewis's heart may prove more lasting than his head at this point." Or to put it another way, it will take all the ingenuity we can muster to successfully steal past those ever-watchful dragons.

[logos]

NEXT: The attraction of agape

[logos]

.

[blue-duncan]

"As Christian apologists in a visually oriented culture, we must engage our audience by using concrete and captivating imagery and a whole array of imaginative means. As William Abraham has noted, "the use of narrative, allegory, drama, fantasy, poetry and the like, may prove extremely important in the articulation of the Christian faith and in opening up the heart and the mind to the depth and simplicity of the gospel."

Boy, have you done it now. Here we go with the
seeker sensitive" debate all over again.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you oh so very much for this next installment!

blue-duncan: Here we go with the seeker sensitive" debate all over again.

Indeed. And I am surprised there is anything to debate. One would not use Chinese to evangelize among the Spanish-speaking.

Paul spoke the language of Greek philosophy in Athens (Acts 17) but the language of Scripture among the Jews. In court, he spoke in terms of Roman law and tradition. When he addressed the Corinthians in I Cor - he narrowed the audience for his rebuke to those who are sanctified. And in Hebrews, he makes a clear distinction between those on milk and those on meat.

When a child asks us how the TV works, do we go into a long dissertation of cathode ray tubes or tell him where the "on" button is located?

Likewise, if we are speaking to an agnostic or atheist who understands the language of art or literature - then we are well advised to speak his language to get his attention. In the same way, to philosophers, mathematicians, physicists, biologists.

Once we have made the "connection" then we can turn on the Light!

[blue-duncan]

I agree. The debate seems more over taste than theology. A difference in liturgical cultures more than the core Kerygma. We all need to grow up and move on (can we still use that phrase?).

[Alamo-Girl]

We all need to grow up and move on (can we still use that phrase?).

LOLOLOL! I certainly hope so! Thank you so much for your reply!

[logos]

Here we go with the seeker sensitive" debate all over again.

Only for those who don't understand that the "seekers" in this context are named Lewis and Schaeffer. ;^)

[blue-duncan]

It seems to me we are all seekers at some level, and we forget this. The paragraph, I quoted, seems to indicate that Lewis and Schaeffer would have used all of the modern resources available, either at hand or by illustration, to present the message in a way calculated to reach the audience. the message did not change but the tools did. Just by Schaeffer's use of film and sound to reach a wider more visually attuned audience, and his promotion of Rookmaaker's work, would seem to indicate that he was not going to concede any means, necessary to present the gospel, to the world systems.

[GLENNS]

A difference in liturgical cultures more than the core Kerygma

Perhaps there is no difference in the "core Kerygma" on the surface level but when worship becomes all about "bringing in God's presence" as a means for self-gratification and the emphasis shifts from the object to the subject, then I would say that the underlying "core Kerygma" has radically changed.

[blue-duncan]

"but when worship becomes all about "bringing in God's presence" as a means for self-gratification and the emphasis shifts from the object to the subject, then I would say that the underlying "core Kerygma" has radically changed"

I couldn't agree more, however that danger is close by any movement of the Spirit. I have represented Fundamentalist, Bible Believing, Independent Baptist and Nondenominational Churches and found as much worldliness there, in their pride for being on the outside, Calvinist or Arminian, or King James Only, or independent,or the only church preaching the "truth", or Pretrib, Posttrib, Midtrib or what have you, as there is apparently, in some of the more contemporary worship church's. They both are worldly because their aim is to satisfy the flesh, as you say self-gratification. One satisfies the emotions the other the ego or pride and both are abominable to God as "will worship".

But that condition is not indicative of either family of churches. For the most part, from my experience and from what I have read and heard, the churches are doing what they are supposed to do with either method of or plan for worship and communal study. They are being faithful to the calling God has given them for their particular situation. They are able to sift chaff from the wheat in the programs they are using. There will be mistakes, and we are quick to point out the abuses in the other camp, but if we look closely and pray for the expansion of the Kingdom, I think we will see that for the most part God is blessing Piper's work, Warren's work, Hybel's work, Sproul's work, Kennedy's work (but not Swaggert's)and the elect are being saved and moved on to maturity in conformity to the image of our Lord. We should be praying for the Pastors and churches in our localities. They are under tremendous pressures today, both outside the church and inside. They don't need the added misery of brothers against brothers, fighting over methods while the world and MSM delights in our discomfort.

[Alamo-Girl]

Great catch, logos! Hugs!

[Alamo-Girl]

It seems to me we are all seekers at some level, and we forget this.

Indeed. And it certainly seems to help to share our testimony wrt the seeking with others.

[GLENNS]

"We should be praying for the Pastors and churches in our localities. They are under tremendous pressures today, both outside the church and inside."

I'm always in awe of the responsibilities of contemporary Pastors especially in light of our current culture of transition. Yes, we should pray especially hard for the shepherds in these strange times.

I don't believe that the current dilemna is so much a liturgical or ecclesiatical conflict as it is a cultural and epistemological dividing line. The conflicts that we see here for the most part reflect the old modernists controversies of propositional theology and are really school-girl histronics compared to the blog wars going on over the post-modern question.

We are in that period of parentheses, if you will, between the modern and post-modern, or as Best and Kellner say in their book ,Postmodern Turn: “in an interregnum period in which the competing regimes are engaged in an intense struggle for dominance.”

The Postmodern condition was an inevitable reaction, IMO, against the hyper rationalism and autonomous self of Modernity. That pride that you spoke of is the direct result of the enlightment project manifesting itself upon the Church. Modernity is characterized by it's goal to achieve certitude, universal principles, and mastery over the natural or even the textual. These were reflected in the Church and resulted in the rise of sectarianism. Each of the sects believed it was certain of the universal principles they derived from the Text.

In the secular realm the Postmodernists reacted against foundationalist project that reason could be neutral and truth could be built upon truth. _{keep this under your hat but Van Til is in a way a pre-postmodern with his rejection of natural theology and the idea of nuetral reasoning.} With the fall of foundationalism so did the idea of any absolute truth, and in its most radical form, nilhism. In its milder forms we see the subjectivity of truth and the switch from the universal principle to the experience of the particular, from the objective to the subjective. We see this being played out in theology and the "emergent church".

The Postmodern church is less interested in propositional doctrine and more interested in the "journey". Their "core Kergma", as you call it, is less about the objective nature of the Atonement, the metanarrative, and more about the experience of the Incarnation and bearing crosses, the personal narrative. It is less about the internalism of the truth and more about the externalism of the community. It tries to escape the strictures of culture thru "creative" language, in short, new forms of culture, thought, and experience.

So yes, we need to pray especially hard for our shepherds during this time of parentheses as our culture and the Church struggles to find the mediating balance between the universal and the particular.

[betty boop]

Lewis was exceptionally proficient at offering an angle of vision that shifted a negative charge into a positive proof. It is in these moments of surprise that many are most vulnerable to the truth.

LOLOL logos! "Vulnerability to truth." Would that we all were so vulnerable! Unfortunately, the reverse often seems the case these days....

Lewis frequently resorts to techniques of surprise to "capture" his reader. And once he's got you, usually he's got you good. :^)

Thanks so much for today's installment!

[blue-duncan]

`Man, you wrote this at 12:00A.M Saturday night I am impressed! You must either be a Pastor, taking a break from preparing his sermon or an intellectual marathoner. I shut down about 11:00P.M.. I am on my way to church so it will be some time in the P.M. that I get back. I just wanted to get this off to you to let you know how much I appreciated you work.

[Alamo-Girl]

"Vulnerability to truth." Would that we all were so vulnerable! Unfortunately, the reverse often seems the case these days....

Sadly, so very true. Thank you for your insight!

[blue-duncan]

"I'm always in awe of the responsibilities of contemporary Pastors especially in light of our current culture of transition. Yes, we should pray especially hard for the shepherds in these strange times."

"I don't believe that the current dilemna is so much a liturgical or ecclesiatical conflict as it is a cultural and epistemological dividing line. The conflicts that we see here for the most part reflect the old modernists controversies of propositional theology and are really school-girl histronics compared to the blog wars going on over the post-modern question."

When I attended seminary some 20 years ago, the battle in evangelical seminaries was over classical and systematic theology vs practical theology. This also included the study of the original biblical languages. Practical theology won the day and systematics, philosophical theology and intensive study of the languages were replaced with truncated, watered down survey courses, and replaced with homiletics and counseling courses. Church history was given short shrift and in its place education courses were added. I was fortunate in being in one of the last classes in my seminary to receive a proper seminary education, including logic, philosophy and intensive courses in liberal and liberation theology. However, what I did find out is that most Pastors wouldn't know epistemology, teleology or ontology from eschatology or apocalyptic writing. They know whatever commentary they are reading at the time or whatever software they are using. They are semi skilled in counsel-ling, and for the most part they are happy to counsel since that is an excuse for not having to study. They would not know Lyotard, Foucault, Derrida or Harvey if they met them. In fact, most would know Postmodernism only as an epithet, not in its real meaning or usage. Sort of like when we went through the "pseudo intellectual" phase or the "secular humanism" phase. The label was supposed to have meaning without having to explain it. Is it any wonder that they search for method over substance?

That being said, I am constantly overwhelmed with amazement with the way the Lord preserves his elect in spite of this state of affairs. He saves, keeps and sanctifies His own with the meagerest of diets. Of course behind each stammering shepherd is the Holy Spirit taking the crumbs and miraculously making a nourishing spiritual meal for His people. The great hope of all of this is the church is His Son's bride and He won't let anything happen to it. He will nourish it, exercise it, try it, mature it and purify it inspirer of any deficiencies in the shepherds.

The Scriptures command us to esteem them very highly for their works sake. That to me means prayer, encouragement, fellowship with them and supporting them in what they sense the Lord is calling them to do. They may have picked up some erroneous thinking along the way, but the Lord did, can and does "thwart the counsel of Ahithophel" even when a Saul doesn't know it. Through prayer and discussion and, what I do, give them books to read by authors like Piper, Sproul, Packer, Stott, White, Willard, etc. and then discuss it with them over the coffee bar at your church, (you do have one don't you?). Most young Pastors do not have the resources to buy books or have not formed the habit of reading outside of their study requirements. That's where we come in. The Lord seems to have given you a passion for understanding truths that most Pastors would not begin to understand and yet they need someone to explain the truths to them so they can either detect or correct any error in their thinking or in that of the congregation. It is like being the watchman for our Pastors. We have the time and resources to see the danger in this culture and in the popular philosophy and we have the responsibility to pass on that warning to our Pastors. By the way have you read the book "Seinfeld and Philosophy" it is just what you are writing about and the author puts it in a way that is easy to understand..

[GLENNS]

That being said, I am constantly overwhelmed with amazement with the way the Lord preserves his elect in spite of this state of affairs. He saves, keeps and sanctifies His own with the meagerest of diets. Of course behind each stammering shepherd is the Holy Spirit taking the crumbs and miraculously making a nourishing spiritual meal for His people. The great hope of all of this is the church is His Son's bride and He won't let anything happen to it. He will nourish it, exercise it, try it, mature it and purify it inspirer of any deficiencies in the shepherds.

Assurance, faith, hope and love all in one short paragraph. Your church is blessed to have you as a Pastor.

By the way have you read the book "Seinfeld and Philosophy" it is just what you are writing about and the author puts it in a way that is easy to understand.

No, but it sounds good. (just great, another book I need to buy. ;)) Currently reading POSTMODERN THEOLOGY edited by Kevin Vanhoozer

[blue-duncan]

Not to over burden you, but if you want a good over view and comparison of the different systems of evangelical theology, try Gordon Lewis' "Testing Christianity's Truth Claims". He covers Buswell, Clark, Van Til and Carnell among others. It is a very tool, especially in this forum.