Imagine the scene: You are having a conversation with an unbelieving friend. After sharing the Gospel with them, plus a few historical pieces of evidence that support the reality of the resurrection, your friend gives a pointed critique: “Even if Jesus was raised from the dead, it is a bit arrogant to say that he is the only way to be saved.”
At this point, you are no longer simply evangelizing. You are now engaged with the work of apologetics, which, of course, often accompanies the proclamation of the Gospel. Your friend’s critique is the result of a certain worldview that explains everything by saying that there is no universal meaning in anything. A worldview that says truth is subjective and all religions essentially teach the same thing. To answer your friend, citing more evidence simply won’t do. You must answer the objection by presenting the Gospel in the context of an entire worldview: where we came from, why we are here, and where we are going. Nothing does this better than biblical theology.
While there is unceasing debate around which method of apologetics is “best,” the contention of this article is simple: Christian apologetics must be built upon the foundation of biblical theology. To put it another way, when Christians seek to defend the faith, their responses should be situated within and flow from the storyline of Scripture and the worldview that this narrative embodies.[1]
1. I assume “Presuppositional Apologetics” in this article. For an excellent introduction to and defense of presuppositional apologetics, see Greg Bahnsen, Always Ready: Directions For Defending the Faith (Nacogdoches, TX: Covenant Media Press, 1996). See also Michael J. Kruger, “The Sufficiency of Scripture in Apologetics,” The Master’s Seminary Journal 12, no. 1 (Spring 2001), 69–97.
To demonstrate this, I’ll first explain the need for biblical theology in our current intellectual culture, which sets the stage to consider two ways that biblical theology provides a foundation for the task of Christian apologetics. To conclude, I’ll give an example in which a Christian response is given to an opposing worldview using a biblical-theological framework from Augustine’s classic work, City of God.
The Intellectual Culture & The Need for Biblical Theology
We are living in a world that could be rightly characterized as being post-Christian, post-modern, and religiously pluralistic. What I mean is that we live in a world in which the Christian worldview is now in the minority, universal truth claims (“men cannot be women,” “murder is always wrong,” etc.) are rejected, and all religions are treated as being equally valid.[2]
2. I am borrowing the term “Post-Christian” from Francis Schaeffer, by which he meant a “world in which Christianity, not only in number of Christians but in cultural emphasis and cultural result, is now in the minority.” Francis Schaeffer, Death in the City (Wheaton: Crossway, 2012), 13.
The Christian must realize the three implications of the current cultural moment, each tied to one of the characteristics above:
(1) When dialoguing with unbelievers, we cannot assume they have even an elementary understanding of the storyline that the Bible presents;
(2) Post-modernism’s “incredulity towards metanarratives” demands all the more that Christians know the storyline of the Bible and can demonstrate its coherence in the form of a complete world-and-life view;[3]
(3) With the prevalence of religious pluralism, it is necessary for Christians to demonstrate the uniqueness and exclusivity of their worldview whilst providing critiques of those views that oppose it.
3. Stephen Wellum, Systematic Theology: From Canon to Concept, Vol. 1 (Brentwood: B&H Academic, 2014), 66.
Biblical theology is uniquely equipped to address these challenges, as will be demonstrated below.
In The Gagging of God, eminent theologian D. A. Carson has clearly demonstrated the necessity of biblical theology in the current intellectual climate.[4] As Carson has observed, “most evangelistic tools in the Western world are subsets of systematic theology.”[5] Plain evidence of this fact can be found in the fact that many approach apologetics systematically, that is, they seek to defend the faith using categories of systematic theology (e.g., free will, divine providence, etc.) rather than narratively. Carson goes on to note that “there is nothing intrinsically wrong with this pattern as long as most of the people to whom it is presented have already bought into the Judeo-Christian heritage.”[6] That is to say, the systematic theology answers provided to secular objections—and the discussions that ensue—only move the needle if those involved are operating from the same basic theistic worldview.
4. I use ‘biblical theology’ to refer to studying God’s progressive revelation throughout the Scriptures; in other words, biblical theology follows the storyline or “metanarrative” that the Scriptures reveal, beginning with creation and culminating with Christ and his kingdom.
5. D. A. Carson, The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011), 501.
6. Carson, Gagging of God, 501.
In a post-Christian, post-modern, pluralistic culture, biblical theology is foundational for the Christian because the storyline of Scripture provides the basis for worldview formulation, which bears particularly on the task of apologetics, a relationship to which I will now turn.
Biblical-Theology & The Task of Apologetics
Before discussing how the discipline of biblical theology provides the foundation for Christian apologetics, it is necessary to define the latter. The Greek word apologia occurs only eight times in the New Testament. In every instance, the context conjures up images of a defendant in a courtroom pleading their defense or vindication (e.g., Acts 22:1; 25:16). The most oft-cited occurrence of the word appears in 1 Peter 3:15 where Peter exhorts his readers always to be ready to give a defense when someone asks for the reason of the hope within them. This sort of language implies that the subject in question is under attack. Apologetics, then, can be succinctly defined as the task of defending both the coherence and uniqueness of the Christian worldview.
Moreover, as Michael Kruger has rightly said, “if evangelicals fail to consider and respond to the underlying presuppositions of the unbeliever, then he will simply ‘reinterpret’ their facts within his own worldview.”[7] The task of Christian apologetics therefore is two-fold: (1) to defend the truths of the Christian worldview and (2) to provide a critical evaluation of those worldviews that oppose it. In short, to engage in the work of apologetics is to engage in worldview conflict.
7. Michael J. Kruger, “The Sufficiency of Scripture in Apologetics” The Master’s Seminary Journal 12 no. 1 (Spring 2001), 76.
Recalling the implications mentioned above, biblical theology is foundational to the task of apologetics in at least two ways. First, biblical theology provides the content of the Christian worldview that must be defended. Second, biblical theology offers a narrative framework within which objections can be posed and responses provided. That is to say, as critics of Christianity seek to dismantle Christian beliefs, biblical theology offers a storyline that objections must address as a whole. Subsequently, the answers we provide as we strive to defend the faith must align with the broader narrative that Scripture tells. Let’s briefly explore each of these in turn.
Biblical Theology Provides the Content of the Christian Worldview
What is a worldview? Ronald Nash defines the term as “a set of beliefs about the most important issues in life.” To be more exact, a worldview “is a conceptual scheme by which we consciously or unconsciously place or fit everything we believe and by which we interpret and judge reality.”[8] As Christians work to trace out the storyline of Scripture, it becomes quite evident that the biblical authors wrote with a particular perspective on life. In other words, the biblical authors had a worldview through which they interpreted God’s action in history.
8. Ronald H. Nash, Worldviews in Conflict: Choosing Christianity in a World of Ideas (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 16.
Stephen Wellum argues that biblical theology “approaches Scripture according to its own claim; namely, Scripture is God’s word written.”[9] If then, as Jim Hamilton has argued, the goal of biblical theology is to “learn the practice of interpretation from the biblical authors so that we can interpret the Bible and life in this world the way they did,” Christians are obligated to allow the Bible to speak for itself, which includes adopting the presuppositions and worldview commitments of the biblical authors.[10] As we undertake the task of biblical theology, our worldview is informed by the same worldview commitments as those of the biblical authors.[11]
9. Wellum, Systematic Theology, 23.
10. James M. Hamilton, The Glory of God in Salvation Through Judgment: A Biblical Theology (Wheaton: Crossway, 2010), 42.
11. A simple example of this is the belief of the biblical authors that there is one true God and not several competing gods.
Biblical Theology Provides a Narrative Framework
The content of the Christian worldview does not come to us in isolated propositions but rather in the form of an unfolding story. Thus, biblical theology provides a narrative framework within which Christians should think about the world and their experiences within it. By placing other theological disciplines, including apologetics, within the narrative provided by biblical theology, “the discussion and priorities that emerge look rather different when the Bible’s storyline, climaxing in Christ and his cross-work, resurrection, exaltation and reign, are taken into account.”[12]
12. Carson, Gagging of God, 547.
To cite Nash once again, “the case for or against Christian theism should be made and evaluated in terms of total systems.”[13] In other words, opposing worldviews must seek to establish their critique of Christianity based not on their own presuppositions, but based on the worldview that the Bible provides in its storyline. Biblical theology provides Christians with an interpretive lens (read: worldview) in the form of a narrative within which objections can be posed and answers given. An example of situating an objection/response within the storyline of the Bible comes to us in Augustine’s response to the philosopher Porphyry.
13. Nash, Worldviews in Conflict, 20.
Example: City of God and Augustine’s Response to Porphyry
Following the sack of Rome in 410 AD, Christians faced vile accusations, the chief among them being that the fall of Rome was a direct result of their refusal to worship the Roman gods. In response, the early church father Augustine penned the impressive twenty-two book volume The City of God (De Civitate Dei) not only to address such a serious accusation but to challenge pagan beliefs of reality and the nature of God’s providential dealings throughout history. In books one through five of City of God, Augustine addresses the pagan notion that the Roman gods were to be worshipped for temporal benefits. Using the history of Rome as his source material, Augustine demonstrates that, historically speaking, worshiping a multitude of gods in the past has not prevented disaster and suffering. Having thoroughly refuted the claim that worshipping the gods was justified for temporal blessings, in books six through ten, Augustine takes up the further pagan objection that the Roman gods were to be worshipped not for temporal, but eternal ends.[14] Augustine summarizes the worldview issues in the form of a simple question: “With a view to future blessedness after death, is it right to worship one God, or many?” On this question, Augustine interacts with the Platonists, whom he deems “the best known of all philosophers.”[15]
14. “The task before us is a matter of supreme importance: to establish that the true and truly holy Divinity is to be sought and worshipped not with a view to this mortal life, which passes away like smoke (although we do receive from the Divinity the help needed for our present frailty), but for the sake of the life of blessedness, which must needs be the life of eternity.” Augustine, Concerning the City of God Against the Pagans, trans. Henry Bettenson (London: Penguin Group, 2003), 254.
15. Augustine, City of God, 371.
In particular, Augustine interacts with the writings of the philosopher Porphyry, who was a student of Plotinus, the Neo-Platonist.[16] With reference to the worship of the gods and the eternal state, Porphyry believed the way to be united with the supreme God in death was through philosophy, that is, a purifying of the intellectual soul.[17] At the same time, Porphyry believed only a select few could become philosophers and as such, most people would need a different way of reuniting with the divine. Thus, very hesitantly and inconsistently, Porphyry endorsed a practice known as theurgy for the masses.[18] In light of Porphyry’s inconsistencies, Augustine charges that Porphyry maintained “two contradictory positions, and [wavered] between a superstition which amounts to the sin of blasphemy, and a philosophical standpoint.”[19]
16. John Frame helpfully defines Neoplatonic thought as follows: “The philosophy of Plotinus and others, teaching that everything is an aspect of a oneness, embodying that oneness in varying degrees.” John Frame, A History of Western Philosophy and Theology (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2015), 764. For more information about Neo-Platonism, see Robert Lyon, “What is Christian Platonism? (Part 1): An Introduction in Three Steps,” Christ Over All, October 25, 2023.
17. Augustine, City of God, 384.
18. Theurgy (Greek: theourgía) refers to the pagan practice of rites and rituals used to invoke the gods to receive revelation.
19. Augustine, City of God, 384.
Porphyry’s system had a noticeable gap, which he himself acknowledged, and that is, according to his philosophy, no universal way of liberation by which the souls of men could participate in the life of their Creator had been established. Concerning the Christian view, Porphyry acknowledged that Jesus of Nazareth was indeed a pious man, but he despised the idea that the eternal God should assume a human nature. As such, Porphyry’s objection to the Christian view of salvation hinged upon his denial of the Incarnation.
Augustine answers that the Christian religion, in which God assumed to himself a human nature and “in the manhood which he assumed and through which he willed to be also a priest, has designed to become a sacrifice for us,” is the religion “which contains the universal way for the liberation of the soul.”[20] See what categories Augustine uses in his answer: He grounds his response in the historical account of Abraham being called out of the land of Ur of the Chaldeans whilst citing the promise that the one, true God gave to Abraham: “In you all the families of the earth shall be blessed” (Gen. 12:3). In an earlier book, Augustine established that for man to have a sufficient mediator between himself and God, that mediator must be truly divine and truly man.[21] Therefore, Augustine argues the promise to Abraham was fulfilled in Christ, who “so long afterwards, the Saviour, who took flesh from ‘the seed of Abraham,’ said of himself, ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life.’”[22]
20. Augustine, City of God, 420.
21. “[A]ll men, as long as they are mortals, must needs be also wretched. If this is so, we must look for a mediator who is not only human but also divine, so that men may be brought from mortal misery to blessed immortality by the intervention of the blessed mortality of this mediator.” Augustine, City of God, 359.
22. Augustine, City of God, 423.
Two observations of Augustine’s response are relevant to our discussion. First, Augustine takes as his source of authority the Holy Scriptures, which “are the writings of outstanding authority in which we put our trust concerning those things which we need to know for our good.”[23] Porphyry claimed that in his study of history, the universal way of salvation had not been made known to him. Augustine rejoins by appealing to the historical record, or storyline as it were, that has “taken possession of the whole world by its towering authority.” In Scripture, “the events of the past are so narrated as to be also prophecies of the future,” and as such provide men with a reliable witness to God’s plan of salvation, which centers upon God the Son Incarnate.[24]
23. Augustine, City of God, 431.
24. Augustine, City of God, 424.
This leads to the second observation. To defend the Christian proposition that Jesus is not a way to be reconciled to God, but the way, Augustine situates his reply within the historical narrative found in Scripture, a narrative that Augustine picks up with the patriarch Abraham. Rather than beginning with evidence for, say, the resurrection of Christ, Augustine demonstrates that God has written a story—a story that reveals his plan of salvation for the world. The story of God’s covenant with the Hebrew people included explicit prophecy concerning the mediator between God and men, and it was also revealed through types—“the temple, the priesthood, and the sacrifices”—all of which find their fulfillment in Christ. Furthermore, Jesus’s incarnation, ministry, teaching, death, and resurrection confirmed the prophecies of old as “he and his blessed apostles now revealed the grace of the new covenant and disclosed openly what in previous ages had been indicated by veiled allusions.”[25]
25. Augustine, City of God, 423–24.
Conclusion
In closing, let’s return to the imaginary friend at the beginning of the article. How can you heed D.A. Carson’s counsel and imitate Augustine as you seek to address your friend’s objection to the exclusivity of Christ? Rather than simply presenting facts about the Gospel with a few pieces of historical evidence sprinkled throughout, tell the Gospel as a story. By placing your conversation in the broader context of creation, fall, redemption, and consummation, not only will you faithfully proclaim the Gospel in all of its glory, you also will have set the terms of the discussion for defending and proclaiming the exclusive work God has wrought through Christ.
As the inspired Word commands Christians to stay ready to give a defense of the reason for the hope within them, Scripture provides the tools for the task (2 Tim. 3:16–17). While building our evangelistic and apologetic approaches upon the foundation of biblical theology, “all those who do not believe in it, and therefore fail to understand it, may attack it; they cannot overthrow it.”[26]
