CA312

Christian Evidences LESSON 05 of 12

The Verification of Biblical Christianity, Part 1

Victor M. Matthews, STD

Former Professor of Systematic
Theology Grand Rapids
Theological Seminary

This is lecture 5 of the course entitled Christian Evidences. We’ve

had one lecture on the introduction to Christian Evidences, three
lectures on the nature of biblical Christianity, and now I would
like to give a lecture on the verification of biblical Christianity.

How do we know that Christianity is true? It’s not enough to have

been raised in the Christian church. It’s not enough to accept it
as a moral way of life. We must have reasons for our faith. We do
not become a Christian because we have what may well be called
intellectual reason. This is the exhortation to testify concerning
the reasons for our faith. It’s important that we ask the question
concerning verification of biblical Christianity, How do we know
that Christianity is true? We know that Christianity is true because
God has revealed Himself and in the revelation of Himself has
given evidences that this revelation is from Himself.

The whole question of verification, whether you’re talking

about Christianity or any other facet of life, is a very important
one. Allow me to recommend two books to you. If you would
be interested in this subject, allow me to urge you to read the
appropriate sections in the very fine book by Hunter Mead (that’s
M-E-A-D, Hunter Mead), and the title of the book is Types and
Problems of Philosophy: An Introduction [New York: Henry Holt,
1951]. Dr. Mead is not a Christian, but he has written a fine book
on an introduction to philosophy, and within this book he will
have sections on epistemology that have to do with what is truth
and how we can know the truth. I would urge that you read the
appropriate sections. It will give you good background for the
whole problem of the verification of Christianity.

Another book that’s even more valuable than the one by Mead
has been written by Warren C. Young, and the title of the book is A
Christian Approach to Philosophy [1954; reprint ed., Grand Rapids,
MI: Baker, 1967]. Any good book of logic or any good book that
would have to do with the introduction to philosophy would give
the basic material as to how we verify what we believe. There are

Transcript - CA312 Christian Evidences  1 of 9

© 2015 Christian University GlobalNet. All rights reserved.
Lesson 05 of 12 The Verification of Biblical Christianity, Part 1

three ways of doing this. The philosophical ways of verification

have to do with the correspondence theory, the coherence theory,
and pragmatism.

Verifying Christianity by the Work of the Holy Spirit in Our

Lives

When we come to Christianity, it’s rather important that we be

serious concerning the verification of our faith. First of all in this
lecture, I would like to raise a question in your mind as to why
we as Christians accept the Scripture as our final authority. Why
is it as believers that we simply accept the Word of God as our
final authority? We do so as we know from the Scripture, we do so
because of God’s work in our lives. For example, read the very fine
passage in Romans 8:14–15, “For as many as are led by the Spirit of
God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of
bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption
whereby we cry Abba, Father.” And in verse 16, “The Spirit itself
beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God.”
These verses testify to the truth that in the life of every believer
there is the witnessing ministry of the Holy Spirit testifying to us
that we are God’s children. We know, of course, the basis of that
testimony, and that is that the blessed Holy Spirit reminds us that
God has spoken to us authoritatively in His Word, and because of
this authoritative revelation, there is then a basis for believing
that we are the children of God.

The same type of passage is found in Galatians 4. It’s interesting

how many times we have these references in the Scripture. In
Galatians 4:6 we have these words, “And because ye are sons,
God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying,
Abba, Father.” That said just about the same thing as the book
of Romans in chapter 8. Probably the most important passage in
the whole Bible concerning the witness of the Holy Spirit in our
lives is found in 1 John 5. First John 5:9–12 reads, “If we receive
the witness of men [that is, we believe what people tell us; that
is, those that we accept as authorities in our lives], the witness
of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath
testified of his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the
witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a
liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.
And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and
this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that
hath not the Son of God hath not life.” All of this is summarized in
the thirteenth verse, “These things have I written unto you that
believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye

Transcript - CA312 Christian Evidences  2 of 9

© 2015 Christian University GlobalNet. All rights reserved.
Lesson 05 of 12 The Verification of Biblical Christianity, Part 1

have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son
of God.”

In this passage we are reminded in verse 10, “He that believeth on

the Son of God hath the witness in himself.” That’s important to
see that this is not feeling generated by the Holy Spirit. Oh, no,
no. It’s very important that we understand that it is not a feeling.
It is deep conviction brought into our lives by the Holy Spirit that
the Word of God is true, and on the basis of what the Word of God
has said, therefore, we can have the assurance of salvation. That’s
why in the thirteenth verse the apostle John under inspiration
states, “These things have I written unto you . . . that ye may know
that ye have eternal life.”

Now to answer the question, Why is it that as believers that we

accept the Scripture as our final authority? We would say from
the Scripture it is because of the witness and the ministry of the
Holy Spirit to us, and He has testified to us that the Word of God
is truth. On the basis of that truth, since we have obeyed the Word
of God, we have believed in the Lord Jesus Christ as our Savior
and Lord, we have repented of our sin; therefore, we have been
recipients of eternal life.

It’s interesting in the history of Christian thought how many

people have recognized this great truth. For example, it was John
Calvin, in his fine volumes The Institutes of the Christian Religion,
many, many years ago said,

There are other reasons and those neither few nor weak by
which the native dignity and authority of the Scriptures are not
only maintained in the minds of the pious, but also completely
vindicated against the subtleties of our enemies, but such [that
is, these other reasons], but such as alone are not sufficient to
produce firm faith in it until the heavenly Father, discovering His
own power therein, places its authority beyond all controversy.
Wherefore the Scripture will then only be effectual to produce the
saving knowledge of God when the certainty of it shall be founded
on the internal persuasion of the Holy Spirit. Thus, those human
testimonies which contribute to its confirmation will not be useless
[and he would be referring here to such things as manuscript
copies in archaeology in such Christian evidences] . . . Thus those
human testimonies which contribute to its confirmation will not
be useless if they follow the first and principle proof as secondary
aids. [1.8.13]

Transcript - CA312 Christian Evidences  3 of 9

© 2015 Christian University GlobalNet. All rights reserved.
Lesson 05 of 12 The Verification of Biblical Christianity, Part 1

Here, John Calvin so many years ago in The Institutes of the

Christian Religion states that it’s the ministry of the Holy Spirit to
us concerning the reliability of the Scripture.

Some years ago I was doing some work on Clement of Alexandria,

and Clement was a very famous man, as you well remember. He
was head of the catechetical school in Alexandria for some years,
very famous early church father. We have four of his books that he’s
written. In the book entitled The Stromata, . . . he states, “He who
believeth then the divine Scriptures with sure judgment receives
in the voice of God who bestowed this Scripture a demonstration
that cannot be impugned. Faith, then, is not established by
demonstration.” And by “demonstration” Clement of Alexandria
means that which is performed apart from the ministry of the
Holy Spirit within Scripture. [The reference is to Ante-Nicene
Fathers: Translations of the Writings of the Fathers Down to AD
325, edited by James Donaldson and Alexander Roberts, 10 vols.
(reprint ed.; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1987), vol. 2; the quote
is from The Stromata, book 2, chapter 3.] These statements made
by God’s children in ages past only underline the great truth of
the Word of God; that is, that the believer accepts the authority of
the Scripture because of the ministry of the Holy Spirit in his life.

But in our witness to other people, it is not easy to rest only

with our own inner conviction. We recognize that we must do
more than that. We must not only give our testimony, as vitally
important as that is, but also tell them what has happened to us.
But now there is a place for going on and saying something by
way of apologetic verification. How do we do that? This brings
me to my second main point in this lecture, and that is the formal
method of apologetic verification.

Verifying Christianity by the a Posteriori Method

Historically there have been two ways of verifying Christianity.

The first one is called the a posteriori method. The Latin phrase
a posteriori means reasoning by starting with observations
of facts and on the basis of those observations formulating an
assumption or a proposition. So, the a posteriori method of
apologetic reasoning or the attempt to verify Christianity in an
a posteriori way means that we would start with the observations
of the world and by looking about us in nature, by looking at the
stars, by looking through the microscope, by examining all of the
facets of our great world of nature, then we would draw on that
basis some assumptions concerning the Creator of the world. The
a posteriori method, then, which has been very popular in history,

Transcript - CA312 Christian Evidences  4 of 9

© 2015 Christian University GlobalNet. All rights reserved.
Lesson 05 of 12 The Verification of Biblical Christianity, Part 1

is going from the observations of the world to God as the Creator.

We probably have all heard the illustration of the watch which

implies the watchmaker. A forceful argument concerning this a
posteriori method has to do with how many times a person would
have to throw the parts of a watch up in the air to have them come
down all correctly united in the form of a watch that would be
running and keeping good time. If a person would take a watch
apart and put it in a basket and then throw it repeatedly up in
the air, how many times would you have to do that before the
various parts would be united in a watch? Or, if you would take
some iron ore and throw it in the air, how many times would it
have to be thrown before it would come down in watch parts, all
then united in a watch that would be running and keeping good
time? These arguments about the watch are given to imply that
a watch demands a watchmaker, and so our world in all of its
intricacies, in all of its design, demands a Creator. Just as a watch
demands a watchmaker, so our world demands a Creator. The a
posteriori argument, therefore, starts by observing the world of
nature roundabout us and on then on that basis attempting to
formulate some assumptions about its origin, that is, in the true
and the living God.

All of the arguments a posteriori for the existence of God are

based upon the principle of causation or design, and that is from
observing the world as an effect. Just as I look at my watch as an
effect, so I can come to the cause of the world—that would be
God, the Creator—just as I come to the watchmaker as the cause
of my watch. This argument has been very popular within history,
and there are four and sometimes five arguments that are used in
this way. Let me give you these arguments.

The Cosmological Argument

There is first of all the a posteriori argument that has been called
the cosmological argument. All of these words are formulated
from Greek terms. The word cosmos in “cosmological” means the
world roundabout us, and the word logical the last part of the word
cosmological refers to the word logos or statements or reasoning
or words; the cosmological argument means words about the
cosmos. The cosmological argument is very simple. It means that
we look upon the world and nature roundabout us, the cosmos,
as an effect, and we have to raise the questions, How can you
account for this effect? What cause is great enough and adequate
enough to account for the great effect of the world roundabout
us? Those who believe in the a posteriori method state that only

Transcript - CA312 Christian Evidences  5 of 9

© 2015 Christian University GlobalNet. All rights reserved.
Lesson 05 of 12 The Verification of Biblical Christianity, Part 1

the true and the living God is an adequate cause.

The Teleological Argument

The second a posteriori argument is called the teleological

argument. The word teleos means purpose or end. The teleological
argument, therefore, would point out that within our world of
nature, we have reflected evidences of intelligence and volition
and purpose. When we observe intelligence all about us, and when
we observe design and purposefulness all about us, therefore, we
are forced to recognize that just as a watchmaker has produced the
watch, so the true and the living God is a necessary assumption
in order to account for the design and the intelligence and the
purposefulness that I see in the world roundabout me.

The Anthropological Argument

The third a posteriori approach has been called the anthropological

argument. Anthropos is the word for man, so this approach would
be words about man. When we observe man, we find that there is
a personality, there is an intelligence, there is a volition in man.
So, when we observe man as a part of nature, what cause would
be adequate to be able to explain the personality, the intelligence,
the volition within members of the human race? Those who
believe in this form of argument would say, It’s only the true and
the living God as an adequate cause can account for the evidence
that we see within the human race.

The Ontological Argument

The fourth argument has been called the ontological argument.

The word ontos comes from the Greek preposition which means
being, so “ontological” would refer to an argument that would
be based upon observations or words about the concept of being
or existence. This one’s a little more difficult than the others.
Rene Descartes put it simply within the history of philosophy. He
recognized that as a finite person and as an imperfect person, he
could not conceive of such a thing as perfection unless there was a
source of perfection. As he looked all about him, he could not see
any source of perfection, nor could he see a source of perfection
within him, so he reasoned that there would have to be a source of
perfection for him to have the idea of perfection. And, therefore,
Rene Descartes believed that the true and the living God was the
source of the concept of perfection. Therefore in order to explain
ontologically the understanding of infinity and perfection in such
great terms, I would have to believe in the true and the living God.

Transcript - CA312 Christian Evidences  6 of 9

© 2015 Christian University GlobalNet. All rights reserved.
Lesson 05 of 12 The Verification of Biblical Christianity, Part 1

It was Anselm who utilized this ontological argument and said

that by way of definition we can prove God. “God is that being,”
he said, “God is that being, then, which nothing greater can be
thought.” If I can think of God as I must think of Him as existing,
because if I could think of God and if He didn’t exist, then, since
I can think of existence, I can think of something that would be
greater than God. And if God, by definition and some said, if God is
that being than which nothing greater can be thought, therefore,
God must exist by definition. Therefore, Anselm used what has
well been called the ontological argument, and that is that only
the true and the living God is a sufficient cause to produce the
effect in the world.

The Moral Argument

The fifth argument in this a posteriori method of verifying

Christianity is what may well be called the moral argument.
That is, when we observe the human race, we recognize a great
reign of moral law. On this basis, it has been pointed out that
people, no matter how much of an aborigine they may be, how
unsophisticated they may be, give evidence of laws of ethics and
morality. Those who work with the a posteriori argument say, How
can we account for this in the world? How can we account for the
fact that there is morality in every person? They would say only
the true and the living God in all of His holiness and love is a
sufficient cause.

Problems with the a Posteriori Method

When we start out like this, we realize that we may have some
problems with the a posteriori method of verifying Christianity, and
we may have some problems with the cosmological, teleological,
anthropological, ontological, and moral arguments. We recognize
immediately that all of these arguments are based upon the
principle of analogy; that is, just as there is an analogy between
my watch and the watchmaker, so there is an analogy between the
world and the true and the living God. All of these arguments are
based upon the assumption that there is an analogous relationship
between cause (God) and effect (the world).

Transcript - CA312 Christian Evidences  7 of 9

© 2015 Christian University GlobalNet. All rights reserved.
Lesson 05 of 12 The Verification of Biblical Christianity, Part 1

For many, many years, some sections of the Christian church

have been utilizing the a posteriori method. It’s not a very good
method, and this has been pointed out by a famous philosopher.
The name of that philosopher is David Hume. David Hume was
born in 1711, and he died in 1776. David Hume, to my knowledge,
was not a Christian. When he heard the church proving God by
the a posteriori method, because he was a philosopher, he was
naturally interested in such thinking, because one of the great jobs
of the philosopher revolves around the question of verification of
truth. So, David Hume investigated and found that if you work
with the a posteriori method, which is closely tied to the principle
of analogy, then you also have to use the principle of economy.
By the principle of economy David Hume well pointed out that
you can’t get any more out of the effect than you can imply as to
what’s in the effect. You can’t get any more out of the effect than
what’s in it, and therefore David Hume started his reasoning and
performed quite a service for the church by showing that the a
posteriori method was highly questionable.

For example, Hume pointed out that the world is finite, and on
the basis of the principle of analogy and the principle of economy
(the principle of economy means that you can’t get any more out
of the effect than what’s in it), if the world is finite, how can you
get an infinite God as cause out of a finite world? You can’t do it,
David Hume said. And he was right. We do not have, if we have
only this form of argument, a basis for saying that God is infinite
but only that He’s finite. He can be infinite, certainly, but we do
not know that He is simply from our a posteriori arguments about
the world.

David Hume also pointed out that the world is characterized by

great variety. How can we say, on the basis of the variety of the
world, that God is one? It would tend to make us believe more in a
polytheism of some kind, that there are many, many gods because
of the great variety within the world. Hume also said that there
were many seemingly contradictory things in the world. Maybe
this would point to the fact that God is not very intelligible. Hume
also pointed out that the world is not perfect. Of course, we can
explain that by the doctrine of sin, but Hume said that if you’re
simply going to take the a posteriori method, then you have to
work with the principle of economy, and the world is not perfect.

Transcript - CA312 Christian Evidences  8 of 9

© 2015 Christian University GlobalNet. All rights reserved.
Lesson 05 of 12 The Verification of Biblical Christianity, Part 1

Are you going to say, therefore, that God is not good? And then
he said, “That when you look at the world as more animal and
vegetable-like than it is human-like, therefore, you will have to
say that God is more like animals and vegetables than He’s like
those of us as humans.” So David Hume, who died in 1776, pointed
out a great fatal argument concerning the a posteriori method.

In the next lecture, I will talk about an argument that’s much

more important, and that is the a priori method.

Christ-Centered Learning — Anytime, Anywhere

Transcript - CA312 Christian Evidences  9 of 9

© 2015 Christian University GlobalNet. All rights reserved.