Zeal For Truth

The speaker in church yesterday made an argument that I had never heard before, yet really caused me to reconsider an often cited portion of scripture. Acts 17 is a very popular chapter to cite in the argument of cultural sensitivity and reasoned debate for the purposes of evangelism. Paul is upheld as speaking in a very wise and clever way to the wishy-washy Athenians - using their own literature and even their own incorrect religion to wrangle a salvation message out of it.

In fact, to my own shame, I once used this passage to publicly confront a radical street-preacher who was challenging a crowd at the University of Oregon to repent. I argued that what he was saying was correct, but his message was not in the spirit of sensitivity and wisdom which Paul displayed in Acts 17.

But the speaker on Sunday made the argument that Paul was not successful in this method. There was no church ever established in Athens and the argument was likely forgotten in favour of the next new thing within a few days. I think this is a very reasonable argument. It has caused me to rethink Acts 17.

As we know the bible is impartial, and carries both the successes and mistakes of God’s people. We cannot assume that just because it is in the bible, that it is automatically correct and approved. Perhaps this is one of those failures that is recorded in biblical history. After all, we do not ever see Paul using this method again. The stinging indictments in places such as Romans 2 and 1 Corinthians 5 are in bold contrast to Acts 17.

I think that evangelists such as Ray Comfort have it right - that ultimately salvation does not some through arguing with the intellect, but by piercing the heart with the law. Charles Spurgeon made the same case:

If men do not understand the law, they will not feel that they are sinners. And if they are not consciously sinners, they will never value the sin offering. There is no healing a man till the law has wounded him, no making him alive till the law has slain him.

In this interview, Ray Comfort was being grilled a little on his message for not being sensitive enough to his audience. But really, an approach like the Way of The Master is an acceptable way to deal with those people who are just looking for endless philosophising.

The Athenians were aptly described by Luke as those who “spent their time in nothing else but either to tell or to hear some new thing” (Acts 17:21). These people were full to the brim with abstract knowledge, philosophy and theory on all manner of subjects. However, they were never convinced that they must do anything about it - but merely debated these things for entertainment.

In many ways, the church has adopted this attitude. We go to church on Sunday, not be stimulated to love and good deeds, but to hear some new thing. We want our speakers and music to entertain us, and the reason we open the bible is to seek after hidden knowledge (”God please reveal your truth to me”) rather than to obey what we already know.

Even in my own personal study, I have been convicted of this attitude. When I pray before I open scripture, I now pray that God would give me the courage to obey what I read, rather than asking him to reveal some new thing to me. If we cannot change our attitudes as Christians, then it will be even more difficult to apply this understanding to the way we speak to non-believers.