We will in future sessions cover historical aspects of apologetics so this is an important introduction.
Establish the need: What is the relationship between history and Christianity? Does Christianity depend on history and does history itself depend on the Biblical worldview?
Purpose: We will look at four focus to help us think about the relationship between history and a Biblical worldview.
- What is history?
- Christianity is Historical
- History helps us to interpret and defend the Bible
- History needs a Biblical worldview
What is history?
We all have the idea of history dealing with matters of the past (have already occurred).
According to John Warwick Montgomery history is the study of “events or the study of these events.”[1]
According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary history is “a branch of knowledge that records and explains past events.”[2]
History is also the interpretation (giving meaning through explanation such as observing cause-and-effect relationship, motives, goals, etc) of events.
Vern Poythress notes history involves three dimensions: Event, person/people and meaning.[3] This would be important for the final part of this session.
Christianity is Historical
Jesus Christ came as a man in the reality of space-time: “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.” (John 1:14)
- Notice that Jesus was physical: “became flesh”
- Notice that Jesus entered into time.
- Application: Have you show thanksgiving to God for Christ coming down to save us?
The Gospels account of Jesus is intended by the writers to be historical; see also Luke 1:1-4, 2:1-2.
The Resurrection of Jesus was historical: “Now I make known to you, brothers and sisters, the gospel which I preached to you, which you also received, in which you also stand, 2 by which you also are saved, if you hold firmly to the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. 3 For I handed down to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 After that He appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; 7 then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; 8 and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also.” (1 Corinthians 15:1-8)
- In the context 1 Corinthians 15 is about the resurrection.
- Note these are claims about Jesus’ resurrection.
- It seen as happening in reality since there are eyewitnesses (5-8).
History helps us to interpret and defend the Bible
There are three ways we will mention.
First way: History as background for interpretation of the Bible
- If the Bible was written in the reality of space-time to an original audience that means the spheres of historical studies will provide important background information for interpretation.
- Historical information concerning spatial reality: There is Biblical Geography.
- Historical information concerning temporal reality: There is the area of studies concerning social and cultural patterns of the times.
Second way: Biblical languages are historically situated.
- The Bible was written in Biblical Hebrew, Aramaic and Koine Greek.
- These three languages must not be confused with Modern Hebrew, contemporary Greek, etc. Thus they are historically situated.
Third way: History as a field of Christian Apologetics
- If Biblical Christianity claims to be historical, one may ask: “Do we have other witnesses that it is so?”
- Thus, there is a place for marshalling historical data in Christian apologetics under the proper context.[4]
History needs a Biblical worldview
Ways are mentioned here.
First the Bible as the authoritative Word of God interprets historical facts and events.
- God’s Word is worldview lens which we view and interpret the world. See our earlier fifth session in apologetics.
- For example: “Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.” (1Corinthians 10:11)
- This passage provide an explanation of the Old Testament historical narrative.
- It also deals with past events.
- It also states for us these events’ meaning and significance.
To further appreciate history’s dependence upon the Biblical worldview recall Poythress’ definition of history involves three dimension of event, person/people and meaning. Notice in this picture how these three dimensions correspond to the three elements of a worldview:
History needs a Biblical worldview 1: To know about events it requires the foundation for the biblical worldview
- History with regards to events presupposes time but some worldviews believe that time exists.
- Various New Age Cults do not believe time exists.
- For example: the Agasha Temple of Wisdom does not believe time objectively exist: “WE TEACH YOU THAT YESTERDAY IS TODAY AND TODAY IS TOMORROW. ALL TIME IS ONLY BUT EXISTENT WITHIN THE INDIVIDUAL MIND AND SPHERE OF EXISTENCE OF THAT PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL.”[5]
- Christianity does account for the necessary axiom of time
- God created the world in time (6 Days creation).
- God interact with humans in time, so therefore time exists.
- Classical Christian Theism presupposes God created time.
- Recall in our previous session we demonstrated that an atheist worldview with an epistemology of empiricism is self-refuting and therefore the atheist can’t even know things including events. Not so with Christianity.
History needs a Biblical worldview 2: Meaning needs the biblical worldview
- Doing history one gives value judgment such as saying Hitler is evil, that a hero is morally courageous, etc.
- Christianity provides a value system for historical judgment that is necessary for meaning when other worldviews/religions/philosophies does not.
- John Warrick Montgomery says “In order to turn chronicle into history, it is necessary to stress some events and deemphasize others to produce a meaningful narrative. But notice that such emphasizing is inevitably based upon value judgments as to what is important and is not (or better, what is more important and what less important).”
- One’s value judgment is part of one’s worldview/religion/philosophy.
- Thus, in narrating history, values judgment occurs but that value is already in place before historical narration.
- We have already seen how atheism destroys the possibility of norms, ethic and values.
History needs a Biblical worldview 3: Person/People needs the biblical worldview
- With regards to persons a secular worldview believes everything ultimately is impersonal since even a person is nothing more than stardust whose behavior and thoughts are determine by electrons and physics.
- Christianity has Personalism with the very beginning of God.
- Also some Eastern religions think the individual is not important and the “self” is an evil thing that should cease to exist. Such a worldview would not make the study of people in history meaningful if it is something that brings about suffering with “attachments.”
[1] John Warwick Montgomery, The Shape of The Past, (Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship), 8.
[2] Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/history.
[3] Prepublished edition of Vern Poythress, Redeeming Our Thinking about History: A God-Centered Approach, (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway, 2022), 12.
[4] It is possible to marshal evidence in a Presuppositional framework. It is possible to provide evidence that take into consideration that (1) nonbelievers are not neutral but are suppressing the truth, (2) it is not the amount of evidence that the nonbelievers need, (3) we must beware of the sin of autonomy; (4) and presuppositions determine evidence. This will be covered in the next session.
[5] Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20220621205724/http://www.agasha.org/.
Excellent brother. This is it: “First the Bible as the authoritative Word of God interprets historical facts and events.” The bible is our lens.
Shalom!
I like how Poythress approaches history through “three dimension of event, person/people and meaning” and your linking of these to epistemology, metaphysics and ethics requiring a Biblical worldview.
Thanks for noticing those details! Poythress three points was very helpful! And it’s neat to see how the three dimensions “fits” with the three elements of a worldview, which helps us see how bad world views undermine history! Hope you have a blessed day brother!!!
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.
Reblogged this on My Logos Word.
I appreciate this post, Pastor Jim. I just finished reading the book of Esther and I believe it is historical for so many reasons. At the same time Wikipedia says this:
“Persian kings did not marry outside a restricted number of Persian noble families and it is unlikely that there was a Jewish queen Esther…”
Of course it’s unlikely. That’s why the story is so outstanding. It fits with history as we know it beautifully. Xerxes I, who ruled the Achaemenid Empire between 486 and 465 BCE fits the description of Ahasuerus nicely. More is explained in this video:
There is no question in my mind that the Bible is a religious and historical text.
Thanks for sharing this video! I think the last part (part 4) is important in that modern historical studies can take us so far; but if Christianity provides the foundation of history and atheism does not, than our Christian biases is more rationally based than an atheistic worldview that provides the self-defeater to the historical method. So their basis for interpreting things like with Esther being so historically unfounded is already problematic at the get-go; this discussion about historiography and the foundation for history of course does not mean we never discuss history as a Christian. Wow it seems you have really studied up on Esther recently! I suspect you like the OT a lot =)
You’re welcome, Pastor Jim. From my limited knowledge of the Bible, I would say that it fits with many historic facts that are undeniable. I don’t even know where an atheist would start as far as any type of factual foundation. A basis for interpreting Esther needs to have the information in this video included in it. We know where the King’s palace was and it sounds like it is exactly as it is described in the book of Esther. A skeptic can call all of this information coincidence but it is a hard sell. I do like he O.T. a lot and it’s amazing how the prophets who described the history fit it all together so well. Daniel 11 is remarkable. Some people think it was written 350 or so years after it really was because of the accuracy of the prophecies in it about history.
Thanks for this good review examining history in relation to a Biblical worldview. Atheists would love to find historical evidence contradicting the Bible, but they’ve come up empty handed. In contrast is Mormonism where historical evidence completely debunks the Book of Mormon fabrication. Speaking of history, I wish evangelical academicians would examine how the early church devolved into institutionalism and sacramentalism, but there’s little motivation for such a project in this era when said academicians are scrambling to study Aquinas.
Good comment! I think you are right: “ I wish evangelical academicians would examine how the early church devolved into institutionalism and sacramentalism, but there’s little motivation for such a project in this era when said academicians are scrambling to study Aquinas.” it seems to be ecumenical and some Aquinas fan bois are really heated when you talk about issues of salvation and Romanism. I think I’m pretty chill online but this past year some of these Aquinas guys are too much for me. How goes your day???
Thanks, brother! After reading your post and commenting, I checked Wikipedia for more books on the “Constantinian Shift” (the de-evolution of the early church into state sanctioned sacramentalism) and came up with a possibility.
Hotter in ROC (90F) than SoCal today, so I’m just chillin’ in the AC. I drafted another post in the Catholic apologetics series earlier this morning, which always takes a lot out of me.
How’s your Wednesday starting out?
This is really good. Have you started Kruger’s Revisiting Canon?! It has a section on history that reminds me of this.
I have not read it! I bought four books and booklets with me on vacation and apparently there’s so much driving I only finished three and didn’t get to Revisiting Canon at all! But I hope to start it this week!!! Kruger is a Presuppositionalist and a Bible scholar which is the best combination in my view. Did you finish the book???
Yes, I thought it was really good! Sorry I missed this last night, I am I’ll but praise the Lord the dr gave me pills today!
Your last point about history depending on the Biblical God is huge. Wish historical evidential apologists utilize that with handling objections from the atheists
Doing history itself is another “evidence” for Christianity