RESURRECTION evidence vs. GOSPEL?
A response to hearing a disappointing sermon mainly many years ago using little Scripture and relying on evidential probability. smh.
by Tuese Ahkiong
An Example of The Difference Between Evidential Apologetics and Presuppositional Apologetics
The Rich Man and Lazarus
Luke 16:19 “There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. 20 And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man's table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried, 23 and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. 24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’ 25 But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.’ 27 And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father's house— 28 for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.’ 29 But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ 30 And he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 31 He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.’”
Evidential apologetics or evidentialism is an approach to Christian apologetics emphasizing the use of evidence to demonstrate that God exists. The evidence is supposed to be evidence both the believer and nonbeliever share, that is to say you need not presuppose God's existence.
Presuppositional APOLOGETICS is a school of Christian apologetics that believes the Christian faith is the only basis for rational thought. It presupposes that the Bible is divine revelation and attempts to expose flaws in other worldviews. It claims that apart from presuppositions, one could not make sense of any human experience, and there can be no set of neutral assumptions from which to reason with a non-Christian.[1] Presuppositionalists claim that a Christian cannot consistently declare his belief in the necessary existence of the God of the Bible and simultaneously argue on the basis of a different set of assumptions that God may not exist and Biblical revelation may not be true. Presuppositionalism is the predominant apologetic of contemporary conservative Calvinist and Reformed churches.[2] -from wikipedia
Most evidentialists are “free will” believers. They believe that man sits in judgment of whether he will “free will” believe in God or not. Most presuppositionalists believe that God is Sovereign in salvation and giving His salvation to whomsoever He chooses.
Evidentialists believe that given enough evidence a non-believer will believe in God. As you can see from this Bible passage, it is false. There are several evidential apologists like Wiliam Lane Craig, Josh McDowell, Hank Hanegraaf… who use this argumentation. They will present an argument for the resurrection relying on probability, i.e., what's the probability that someone would die for a lie? This technique is confirming for the believer but not for the non-believer. The non-believer is spiritually dead and these arguments are meaningless to him.
The spiritually dead need The Gospel/ God’s Word proclaimed and if it is God’s will to save, God will save.
PROVOCATIVE QUESTION: Who was The Gospel for?