tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post6231728664279233937..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: Book review — If You Could Ask God One Question, by Paul Williams and Barry CooperPhil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger51125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-28906223581558788472008-08-27T20:26:00.000-07:002008-08-27T20:26:00.000-07:00I thought of this post almost immediately when I g...I thought of this post almost immediately when I got a prayer request a few minutes ago from a friend of a group of local pastors who go out and witness to our drug dealers and have seen some respond to Christ. <BR/><BR/>These men go out regularly and some of their congregants go with them. Funny story from tonight: upon being offered prayer one of the dealers warily responded "I don't hold hands with dudes!"<BR/><BR/>:D<BR/><BR/>(Yes, they got past that quickly.)~Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01819856178499938127noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-23930055275338261552008-08-27T07:54:00.000-07:002008-08-27T07:54:00.000-07:00Solameanie: "I'd like to hear Mark's complete rem...<B>Solameanie</B>: <I>"I'd like to hear Mark's complete remarks on this so I can see where he's coming from on it."</I><BR/><BR/>Hope this helps.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/decemberweb-only/101-12.0.html" REL="nofollow"> <B>Dever:</B></A> "Other people mistake apologetics for evangelism. Like the activities we've considered above, apologetics itself is a good thing. We are instructed by Peter to be ready to give a reason for the hope that we have (1 Pet. 3:15). And apologetics is doing exactly that. Apologetics is answering questions and objections people may have about God or Christ, or about the Bible or the message of the gospel.<BR/><BR/>Answering questions and defending parts of the good news may often be a part of conversations Christians have with non-Christians, and while that may have been a part of our own reading or thinking or talking as we came to Christ, such activity is not evangelism.<BR/><BR/>Apologetics can present wonderful opportunities for evangelism. Being willing to engage in conversations about where we came from or what's wrong with this world can be a significant way to introduce honest discussions about the gospel.<BR/><BR/>By far the greatest danger in apologetics is being distracted from the main message. Evangelism is not defending the virgin birth or defending the historicity of the resurrection. Apologetics is defending the faith, answering the questions others have about Christianity. It is responding to the agenda that others set. Evangelism, however, is following Christ's agenda, the news about him. Evangelism is the positive act of telling the good news about Jesus Christ and the way of salvation through him."Truth Unites... and Divideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08891402278361538353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-87719529922949518152008-08-27T05:24:00.000-07:002008-08-27T05:24:00.000-07:00Penn wrote: "Does anyone here speak regularly to t...Penn wrote: "Does anyone here speak regularly to the unbelieving about Christ? Just curious to know, because there is an awful lot of good theology here, and I'm interested to know how it is being distributed to the world outside the inside of the chruches?"<BR/><BR/>About two years ago I had what I believe to be a "Holy Spirit leading" moment on my way to work. At the time, I had been receiving those Nigerian scam emails nearly everyday...sometimes four or five of them. I sat down and created my own gospel response, and I started responding to these emails by blanking out their original email, and inserting my own.<BR/><BR/>I've been doing this now for over 2 years, and I have sent literally hundreds of these "seeds" out. Although only God knows what will come of them, I have had at least three "virtual conversations" with the recipients of these letters that lasted more than 6 exchanges.<BR/><BR/>For the low-key, somewhat shy among us, I can think of no easier way to share the gospel. After all, they sent me the email first, so I'm just responding. Of course, just leaving good tracts in key areas is another low-key way of sharing...one doesn't necessarily need to hand them out to people.<BR/><BR/>I look at it as a "first step" toward a more bold witness.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05091364691248272512noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-49158796484957728572008-08-27T03:18:00.000-07:002008-08-27T03:18:00.000-07:00I love Biblical creativity to reach people's minds...I love Biblical creativity to reach people's minds and hearts. This book's format seems to afford people a kind of partcipation rather than just being an audience.<BR/><BR/>Here is a question I want to ask God:<BR/><BR/>"What question are we not asking but we should?" :)Rick Fruehhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05879848568892457571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-46636293112352970652008-08-27T01:43:00.000-07:002008-08-27T01:43:00.000-07:00Dan,I am familiar with Christianity Explored and B...Dan,<BR/><BR/>I am familiar with Christianity Explored and Barry Cooper. When I was visiting Sinclair Ferguson's church in SC a couple of years ago they had a lady talk about their Christianity Explored program. That course is 10 weeks long. It basically goes through the gospel. <BR/><BR/>Using apologetics in and of itself without the gospel cannot save men. It can only silence them. But if this book can also do apologetics and point people to Christ (I'm interpreting that to mean proclaiming the gospel) then that is good.<BR/><BR/>We have to remember the model used by Paul for the proclamation of the gospel. On three Sabbaths days he <B>reasoned</B> (<I>diele,xato - there was an exchange of questions and answers)</I> <B>explained</B>(<I>dianoi,gwn- open up, explain and interpret)</I> and <B>proved </B><I>(paratiqe,menoj - offering evidence on behalf of something from the Bible)</I> from Scriptures. (Acts 17:1-5). It's important to remember that the Great Commission is really discipleship, not evangelism per se. What Paul was doing through his evangelism was that he was reasoning and explaining and proving from the Scriptures why Christ had to suffered. He was really preparing them for discipleship. <BR/><BR/>In today's sort of American evangelicalism we think we can present the gospel on one whole swoop. It may be presented that way in some places in the Bible like with the Phillipian Jailer but we have to remember that Luke left many details out there and gave one summary statement - He believed and was saved. Paul of course had to tell the jailer what he had to believe in, that Jesus was God, etc.<BR/><BR/>The kinda thing that Dan praised Mark for, working with that person for a couple of weeks is exactly the kinda methodology the apostle Paul uses in Acts 17:1-5 and it's methodology we should be using face-to-face.<BR/><BR/>I can tell you there are people in the world who are using this methodology to draw people away from Christ. An acquaintenance of mine to my dismay became an apostate (another was a good friend). And you know what one person told me, that this person got them to read some books and he explained to her why the Bible could not be trusted. Bam! Just like that. I can assure the world is using this methodology to pull people away from Christ, we better be more equipped to draw people to Christ.<BR/><BR/>So, if it is as a good as you say it is, then it would be a good tool. But I think the leadership will still have to equip (train) their congregation how to do it. It's the same thing with evangelism. You have many people sitting in pews that don't know how to articulate the gospel because they're not being equipped, ergo, they're not being equipped to do apologetics.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, I haven't read this book but I do know about Cooper's Christianity Explored program. I think he can be trusted on this.CRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01912897040503058967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-52327080812903227732008-08-26T20:37:00.000-07:002008-08-26T20:37:00.000-07:00kevin stilley Kant's remark is precisely my poin...<B> kevin stilley </B> <BR/><BR/>Kant's remark is precisely my point. <BR/><BR/>But of course, the doctrine of the logos, Christ must be preached first and foremost. Funny thing is, and I don't know why I didn't see this right away at my first comment, if we preach Christ first, all objections about the existence of God take care of themselves, don't they?Chad V.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02478790778245966382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-15088477677730529482008-08-26T19:33:00.001-07:002008-08-26T19:33:00.001-07:00I would like to suggest that the Logos doctrine, p...I would like to suggest that the Logos doctrine, properly understood, inserted into the incarnational message of John 1 is a much stronger "proof" for postmodernists than is the evidence of creation. However, I do not mean to take anything away from the <I>sensus divinitatis</I> of Romans 1 for I believe that the experience of all men is that of Kant when he said that there were two things he could never get away from -- the starry skies above and the still small voice inside.Kevin Stilleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16613332673067693686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-2649982401774807692008-08-26T19:33:00.000-07:002008-08-26T19:33:00.000-07:00"Don's partner in the GraceLife Pulpit...."Such an..."Don's partner in the GraceLife Pulpit...."<BR/><BR/>Such an inconspicuous reference, Gummby! :)Susanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08289347868497438542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-16246380141168260242008-08-26T19:01:00.000-07:002008-08-26T19:01:00.000-07:00Also, I didn't intend that we first prove creation...Also, I didn't intend that we first prove creationism to an unbeliever but rather that we use the fact of creation to show the person we witness to his sinfulness in denying God's existence. We can show him his sinfulness right off the bat which allows us to progress to the person and work of Christ who came to reconcile sinners to God.Chad V.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02478790778245966382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-21339804493325827592008-08-26T18:58:00.000-07:002008-08-26T18:58:00.000-07:00Stefan That's a good point and I see where you ar...<B>Stefan</B> <BR/><BR/>That's a good point and I see where you are coming from but I could apply the same reasoning to the incarnation. If some one is an ardent atheist, as the person in the book may be, then proving the incarnation becomes it's own tangent. Many atheists have what they believe to be sufficient proof that Jesus never even existed, much less rose from the dead. <BR/><BR/>I think we must always approach witnessing from the presupposition that what the scripture says regarding both the creation and the incarnation, and anything else it speaks of as though it were true and there is no need to prove it. In other words we must operate with the thought in mind that what God says is true and we need not prove it to anyone. Rather instead we allow what the scripture says to penetrate to the division of soul and spirit, joints a marrow and allow it to judge the thoughts and intents of the heart. In other words, we proclaim the truth and the Holy Spirit will apply it and work change in the heart. <BR/><BR/>I think it's important to remember that it is not our job to prove anything to those we witness to. We need not prove God. God reveals Himself and He is after all a God who hides Himself(Isa 45:15). He cannot be proven. <BR/><BR/>I was an ardent evolutionist too. I was converted by a sermon I was reading of John Wesley's, which had nothing at all to do with evolution or creation. After I was saved I believed in the 6 day creation because the bible taught it.Chad V.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02478790778245966382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-39759472045340747102008-08-26T18:31:00.000-07:002008-08-26T18:31:00.000-07:00Chad V.:If you use creation as your jumping-off po...Chad V.:<BR/><BR/>If you use creation as your jumping-off point and your hearer is an evolutionist, you first have to wrestle with that...and then you're getting into debating the merits of creation versus evolutionism...which is a fine topic for discussion in and of itself, but might get you onto a tangent.<BR/><BR/>Then again, it is the first principle. Growing up believing that God didn't even exist, the first step for me was acknowledging that creation testifies to His glory...and I was still an ardent evolutionist (and functionally agnostic) for many years after that.<BR/><BR/>Just my two-cents' worth. I'm not trying to argue with you; I just thought I'd throw that out there.Stefan Ewinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05530690016594029847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-11751753456403586122008-08-26T18:13:00.000-07:002008-08-26T18:13:00.000-07:00Regarding "knowing what you believe," Don Green ha...Regarding "knowing what you believe," Don Green has preached two sermons that address that very idea. Those sermons can be downloaded from <A HREF="http://www.thegracelifepulpit.com/donsermons.htm" REL="nofollow">here</A> for free. <BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.spurgeon.org/images/glsrmns.gif" REL="nofollow">Don's partner</A> in the GraceLife Pulpit has been preaching a series of messages collected as "The Evangelism Toolbox." All of <I>those</I> sermons can be found <A HREF="http://www.thegracelifepulpit.com/philsermons.htm" REL="nofollow">here</A>.<BR/><BR/>(This is a completely unsolicited endorsement, BTW.)Matt Gummhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14698469400042045105noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-92014229222792300392008-08-26T17:22:00.000-07:002008-08-26T17:22:00.000-07:00DJP Yes I see, I had not considered that. It's not...<B> DJP </B><BR/><BR/>Yes I see, I had not considered that. It's not a bad way to go, although Philip was not doubting the existence of God as the person in the book is but rather was asking to see Him in a greater way. <BR/><BR/>But still, yes the book seems to consistently point people to the scripture for real biblical answers, and certainly if we point people to the Son they will see God since he is the exact imprint of His nature and the radiance of His glory. Teaching the incarnation is a great way to do that. Furthermore, if we don't teach the incarnation we do not truly teach the person of Christ.Chad V.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02478790778245966382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-13875973773722287442008-08-26T17:19:00.000-07:002008-08-26T17:19:00.000-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Chad V.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02478790778245966382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-762200015221403032008-08-26T17:10:00.000-07:002008-08-26T17:10:00.000-07:00gumby I see where you're going. Of course the w...<B> gumby </B> <BR/><BR/>I see where you're going. Of course the whole of biblical revelation is a testament to the existence of God. But biblical revelation proves specific things about God. The bible's answer to the question "Why hasn't God proven his existence?" is answered according to scripture by the fact of creation itself. The fact that there is a creation proves that God is real. That is sufficient to that specific question. Going straight to the incarnation seems to bypass the bible's teaching in Romans 1 about the existence of God and the sinfulness of man and how people suppress the revelation of God in unrighteousness. I thought that would be the best way to answer the question "Why hasn't God proved his own existence?" <BR/><BR/>The question itself proves the utter sinfulness of the one asking the question and that he is under the wrath of God. <BR/><BR/>However, I think that I've made a bigger deal out of it than it really is. Point taken. I guess I'm a little cranky today. Sorry.Chad V.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02478790778245966382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-35247207372008603062008-08-26T17:07:00.000-07:002008-08-26T17:07:00.000-07:00This is the first tome I purloined from the stack ...This is the first tome I purloined from the stack that my husband brought home from T4G. It was the smallest and the easiest to sneak on to the table on <I>my side</I> of the bed. <BR/><BR/>It is an excellent refresher for someone like me who has lots of background knowledge but sometimes no good way to put it in terms that won't bore the pants off of my conversation partner. It is an equally good resource to give to someone as a basis for a good apologetic discussion. Thanks commenting on it!UinenMaiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04077219873155040591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-82127554167803138982008-08-26T17:06:00.000-07:002008-08-26T17:06:00.000-07:00Thanks, Chad. I get what you're saying.As to every...Thanks, Chad. I get what you're saying.<BR/><BR/>As to everything you say positively, I agree with you. Unbelievers are without excuse for their unbelief, now, right there, as they stand.<BR/><BR/>Where I'd disagree with you is if you say an appeal to creation is <I>the only way</I> to respond to the actual question these authors employ ("If you're really there, God, why on earth don't you prove it?").<BR/><BR/>The authors of this book don't deny what you're saying, they just take a different approach. I figured everyone would work out that my <I>one-sentence</I> summary of (in this case) an <I>eleven-page</I> chapter would necessarily leave a lot out.<BR/><BR/>As I said, the distinctive feature of this book is that it brings responses straight from Scripture. And so, in this case, they actually key off of Philip saying "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us" (John 14:8). As you know, Jesus replies, "Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?" (John 14:9).<BR/><BR/>And that's why they plunge into to truth of the deity of Christ.<BR/><BR/>See?DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-54549295559675234282008-08-26T16:27:00.000-07:002008-08-26T16:27:00.000-07:00DJP/Frank I've been pondering this discussion and...<B>DJP/Frank</B> I've been pondering this discussion and my comments in particular throughout the day. I realize that the way I worded my original comment, especially the part where I said,<I> "Why a church would use this book for a study with "seekers" I am at a loss."</I> was not expressed with charity. So I apologize. <BR/><BR/>The more I think about this the more I think that a resource like this book could be a valuable tool. For my personal preference I would take a different approach but I can see how this format would be beneficial. So I capitulate as to my overall premise. <BR/><BR/>I'm still unsure though about answering the objection "God hasn't done enough to prove His own existence" by using the incarnation. I think that everyone believes that God is real, they just wont admit it and Romans 1 seems to verify that. Atheists in particular seem to be the ones who are more aware of God's existence than any one else. That's why they spend so much time trying to get every one, including themselves, to believe there is no God.Chad V.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02478790778245966382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-52990593767236695922008-08-26T15:56:00.000-07:002008-08-26T15:56:00.000-07:00Penn:I don't witness like I should. My bigges...Penn:<BR/><BR/>I don't witness like I should. My biggest challenge so far has just been telling my atheist Jewish mother that I am the most unthinkable thing: a Christian—and not merely a nominal mainline one (which might be palatable), but a born-again one! In the secular, liberal city I live in, born-again Christians might as well be from another planet.<BR/><BR/>For her (and another atheist Jewish lady I knew from years ago), the first challenge was explaining how Jesus Christ is the fulfilment of the Old Testament Scriptures—that's where the apologetics came in, and that is where I am going to have focus my efforts in the future, as I give an answer to others for the hope that is in me.<BR/><BR/>[The bigger challenge is that, being atheists, they don't even accept the OT Scriptures as anything other than "myths and legends" (from their points of view). That, and the history of relations between "Christians" and Jews during the middle ages and onwards is not exactly Christ-exalting.]Stefan Ewinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05530690016594029847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-60116754566109374932008-08-26T15:48:00.001-07:002008-08-26T15:48:00.001-07:00S.J. Walker wrote:Either way, it was refreshing to...S.J. Walker wrote:<BR/><BR/><I>Either way, it was refreshing to receive some needed forgiveness, and for my part, to offer it s well. Who knows what will come of it, but I just had to share.</I><BR/><BR/>Soli Deo gloria.Stefan Ewinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05530690016594029847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-594864534146944852008-08-26T15:48:00.000-07:002008-08-26T15:48:00.000-07:00Thanks Dan, your review was quite helpful. I saw t...Thanks Dan, your review was quite helpful. I saw this book earlier in the year and didn't get it, I think I'm going to reconsider that!Rob Hugheshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16444052961373974712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-59474595736984867322008-08-26T15:44:00.000-07:002008-08-26T15:44:00.000-07:00TUAD,I don't know that I'd agree with Mark Dever o...TUAD,<BR/><BR/>I don't know that I'd agree with Mark Dever on that one i.e separating apologetics and evangelism. <BR/><BR/>In fact, the head of the apologetics ministry I am part of has a great message on it called "Apologetics Evangelism - A Marriage Made in Heaven." When 1 Peter 3:15 says that we should give a defense (apologia) for the hope that lies within us, that IS apologetics evangelism. <BR/><BR/>I'd like to hear Mark's complete remarks on this so I can see where he's coming from on it.Solameaniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09869424956571944997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-86646416875264401622008-08-26T14:15:00.000-07:002008-08-26T14:15:00.000-07:00Solameanie said:"It's important to know what cults...Solameanie said:<BR/>"It's important to know what cults and false religions/worldviews believe, along with the history of how the particular group and teaching got its start. It's vitally important to know why we believe what WE believe."<BR/><BR/>I find this to be true, especially the part about knowing the <I>history</I> of false beliefs. It was learning the history of the Cambellite movement that helped to convince me to leave that system.<BR/><BR/>Does anyone here speak regularly to the unbelieving about Christ? Just curious to know, because there is an awful lot of good theology here, and I'm interested to know how it is being distributed to the world outside the inside of the chruches? If that makes any sense to anyone as it does to me?Penn Tomassettihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04426113620189406498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-88764045391332761592008-08-26T13:55:00.000-07:002008-08-26T13:55:00.000-07:00Whoa! I have seen the word "conversation(al)" like...Whoa! I have seen the word "conversation(al)" like four times now. <BR/><BR/>You guys are starting to worry me.<BR/><BR/>Dan, thanks for the review. Good stuff sounds like.<BR/><BR/>On another note, I just got back from taking a long lunch with my old youth pastor. He no longer holds the position by the way. Also, I happened to go out with his eldest daughter years ago, before my beautiful wife came along. <BR/><BR/>As I'm sure most here could relate in some way, I don't exactly have no regrets as to how I behaved back then and certainly regret several of the pig-headed ways I treated her at times. Even this man and I "got into it" now and then years ago.<BR/><BR/>I know this has no bearing on the "conversation", but I had to share it. I hadn't seen him in years and I just dropped by his shop on the fly. We had a really good chat. He was very gracious and we were able to speak very very amicably. <BR/><BR/>He said something very interesting. I mentioned I am teaching young adult Sunday school these days and kind of explained what we have been studying through. He was quiet for a second, then said, "you know, that's one of my biggest regrets. In youth group, we never really dug into the word like we could have and should have". <BR/><BR/>Either way, it was refreshing to receive some needed forgiveness, and for my part, to offer it s well. Who knows what will come of it, but I just had to share.<BR/><BR/>Alright. Go back to the book subject. I'll shut up now.<BR/><BR/>ThanksS.J. Walkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15922550763548455625noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-22685987719244821842008-08-26T13:47:00.000-07:002008-08-26T13:47:00.000-07:00Dan, Sproul Sr. wrote a book years ago called NOW,...Dan, Sproul Sr. wrote a book years ago called NOW, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION! It contained a series of questions people may have about God and Christianity and Sproul's answers to them. Have you ever read that book? If so, how does it compare to this one you're recommending? (I had only skimmed Sproul's work quickly in the past and have never read the one you reviewed today.)Susanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08289347868497438542noreply@blogger.com