Covenantal Apologetics: Principles and Practice in Defense of Our Faith

by K. Scott Oliphint

All Divine Religion (say the Atheists) is nothing else than a human invention, artificially excogitated to keep man in awe; and the Scriptures are but the device of man’s brain, to give assistance to Magistrates in Civil Government. This objection strikes at the root and heart of all Religion & opposeth two main principles at once: (1) that there is a God; (2) that the Scripture is the word of God. 1

pensive,

take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ (2 Cor. 10:5).

add

Edward Leigh,

2The full text of this presentation can be found in K. Scott Oliphint, “Using Reason by Faith,” Westminster Theological Journal 73, no. 1 (2011): 97–112.

We will not seek to knock down every argument, or even every main argument, that has been brought against Christianity. Nor will we seek to lay out every way such attacks and objections have been or can be addressed.

Rather, what we will set out to do, first of all, is to lay out the primary biblical and theological principles that must be a part of any covenantal defense of Christianity and then to demonstrate how these principles might be applied against certain objections.

The principles can be seen as the fence outside of which one should not go, and the actual responses to objections can be seen as specific paths within the fence line.

Small print book - Natural revelation Magnifying glass- Gods word special revelation

The true

God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—created the heavens and the earth, and he created them good.

The entrance of sin in the world was also the initiation of a cosmic war.

Whatever the reason, the temptation of Adam and Eve was an attack on their right relationship with God. And the attack was successful.

(2 Cor. 11:3),

It would have been perfectly acceptable and expected if God had determined at that point to do away with creation altogether. Because the fall of creation was ruinous to its original status as “very good,” and because the reality of sin in the world was despicable to a holy God, he could have simply determined to eliminate the universe, setting things back to where they were prior to his creative activity. God could have continued happily and eternally to exist without creation and all of its now-sinful aspects.

Instead, the Lord determined freely to condescend and extend his grace.

The LORD God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock and above all beasts of the field; on your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life. I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.” (Gen. 3:14–15)

enmity between

all-encompassing war.

The power of God and his plan are now battling against the power of Satan and his legion.

A person is either, by nature (after the fall into sin), in Adam, in which case he is opposed to and in rebellion against God, or he is in Christ, in which case by grace a person is not guilty before God but is an heir of eternal life.

Mat 12:22-30

But why didn’t God, when sin entered the world, simply squash Satan and his legion and finish the battle? Why does he put up with, even actively join the fight against, such rebellion when he could stop it at any time? The only answer we have to such questions is that all things are still working to and for his own glory, even though sin has ruined his creation (Rom. 11:36). Everything that happens, happens according to his all-wise and perfect plan.

(Eph. 6:10–18).

Eph. 2:8; 1 Pet. 3:15; Jude 3).

We should pause here for a moment to consider our place in God’s cosmic battle. A non-Christian friend of mine recently returned from a trip overseas. When I asked him how his trip was, he looked me in the eye and, with finger pointing and shaking in my face, steadfastly declared, “There is no God.” That was the first thing he wanted me to know. He knew I was a Christian, and he was anxious to give me one more reason why he was not. He reasoned that if there were a God, the places that he had seen on his trip would not be in the wretched and Augean conditions that he saw. For him, the suffering he witnessed was so overwhelming that it was a sure indication God could not exist.

“What makes you think that God is responsible for such things?”

It applies to the way we think, the way we act, and the way we view the world.

“Sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with

gentleness and reverence” (1 Pet....

Isaiah 8:12–13

we are required to respond to them.

If we are honest with ourselves, our mind-set may often be more in sync with my friend’s than with Scripture.

How could God allow such a thing to happen? Why wouldn’t he prevent this?

“For Christ also died for sins once for all”

it is not a testimony against that truth.

the deepest expression of his sovereign character as Lord.

Peter’s point is that, if one is to be adequately prepared to give an answer for one’s Christian faith, the lordship of Christ must be a solid and unwavering commitment of one’s heart.

But why?

We are to think about and live in the world according to what it really is, not according to how it might at times appear to us.

After all, if Christ were Lord, how could these things be happening?

The road to his exaltation was paved with blood, sweat, and tears. If we are to be exalted with him on that last day, ours will be so paved as well.

Christ now reigns. He is Lord. All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to him. That

the great commission

Acts 2:35; Heb. 1:13; 10:13).

So

wherever you go, to whomever you speak, Christ is Lord there, and he is ...

They owe him obedience. The same Christ who rules over you, rules over those who oppose him.

The first is that truth is not relative.

He said that there was one cardinal affirmation that every college student believed: “Truth is relative.”

philosopher

“Truth is relative”—ironically, that proposition alone seemed to be universally affirmed and thus not relative.

There is a scene in stranger than fiction one of my all-time favorite movies between the two main characters Harold an IRS agent and Anna a citizen being audited. Where in Ana Treats him with what she feels to be the appropriate level of distain for people in Harold’s profession distain for which Harold is completely oblivious to

anosognosiacs (people unaware of, or denying, our own disease).

a deficit of self-awareness

David Hume,3 who played backgammon even though he knew that such an act annihilated his own philosophy.