Reflections on Schaeffer’s Insight
Francis Schaeffer summarizes the thesis of his book in the first sentence, “The present chasm between the generations has been brought about almost entirely by a change in the concept of truth.” [Francis A. Schaeffer, The God Who Is There, 2nd ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1982), 25.] The first half of the book is dedicated to defending his claim, and the second half speaks to Christianity and the action of the Christian in light of this claim.
The Intellectual & Cultural Climate of the Second Half of the Twentieth Century
In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, it was presupposed that absolutes existed. Due to this, the notion of antithesis was implied and was a means of reasoning together.
Beginning in the realm of philosophy this notion was rejected. They “came to the conclusion that they were not going to find a unified rationalistic circle that would contain all thought... so they shifted the concept of truth.” [31] Relativism was the result, spreading geographically, through society, and from one discipline to another. Gradually trickling down from those consciously rejecting the concept, to those unaware of what was happening and being affected subconsciously.
Without antithesis, truth was to now be sought through synthesis, which disregarded any form of reason. [35-36] Soren Kierkegaard was perhaps the first to champion separating truth from reason, and faith was therefore conceptualized as being a blind leap. The philosophies of the day, had become more accurately considered “anti-philosophies” by Schaeffer. [37]
The next discipline to follow suit was art. Despairing artists of the century were channeling this concept of relativism through their art, almost as if they were saying “everything is chance. Change, the nothingness, is not just shut up in a framed picture, but it is the entire structure of life. You are in the chance, in the nothingness.” [53] Music closely followed, impressing upon the culture that “all is relative, nothing is sure, nothing is fixed, all is in flux.” [56] Homosexuality became more prevalent, because what is heterosexuality if not a fixed idea that needs to be challenged? Drama, poetry, and mass media were all being developed on this idea that if there is no certain truth, there can be no distinction between right and wrong. [61] A dialectical methodology tore through culture, leaving in its wake a despairing culture who had given up the means by which to fix it.
The New Theology
With the wrong concept of truth permeating culture, the next inevitable step was to have it permeate theology. Everything was reanalyzed through the lens of relativism. One could imagine what would happen when even the given theology of the day implies meaninglessness.
Man struggled to live within this inconsistency. As believers, we know this is because we are created as rational beings. As Schaeffer puts it, they “fail to know and function on the level of the whole man.”[80] This is a potential starting point for sharing the truth of Christianity because it aids this tension. More on this below.
Christianity
“Rightly understood, Christianity as a system has the answers to the basic needs of modern man...certainly regarding the reality of individual personality.” [113] The new theology cannot give adequate answers, because any form of communication would be meaningless, because with no fixed meanings there are no fixed meanings for words. Christianity claims the opposite because “within the Trinity, before the creation of anything, there was real love and real communication.” [113]
The scriptures are God’s specific revelation, communicating to His people who are created in His own image. In His Gospel we find the truth which corresponds to our reality, and are stirred to respond in light of His loving sacrifice. Without this truth, love would be meaningless. With no final antithesis between right and wrong, “there can be no such thing a true moral guilt; therefore justification as a radically changed relationship with God can have no meaning.[132]
Speaking Christianity into the Twentieth-Century Climate
A materialist or naturalist could (try to) make a case (built on words which are meaningless), but they are not able to live within the implications of their beliefs.[150] Most non-believers, however, are never pushed to the logical conclusion of their presuppositions. [156] As believers, can we push them to this point, with all gentleness and compassion? Considering the tension they are no doubt dealing with, they just might listen. [157] No one can live at ease within this tension, and this should work on our behalf.
We have the opportunity to offer those lost and enslaved by the ways of the world freedom from tension and despair; it is so much more than wanting to win an argument or point out a fallacy. This will undoubtedly be painful, as coming face to face with reality usually is. We must remind ourselves of the ultimate goal and pursue it unashamedly, embracing the tough love we must show, all the while remaining faithful to walk alongside our audience as they embrace reality.
Pre-evangelism
Schaeffer emphatically regards pre-evangelism as “no soft option.”[169] I would whole-heartily agree that this is a matter that must be taken seriously, and not considered optional in the evangelistic task that confronts us. This the responsibility of ambassadors in order to effectively beg others to be reconciled to God, [2 Corinthians 5:20]
As apologists, as evangelists, as Christians, we need to recognize the context into which we are speaking, and therefore how our audience is interpreting the gospel message we are offering them. If it is into a pantheistic (pan-everything-ism[79]) framework, we have essentially done nothing and our work will return to us void of changed lives.
We cannot simply offer “one more probability into the twentieth-century relativistic people to whom everything is only a probability” [202]. The starting point for conversation needs to be in reference to the concept of truth and establishing it as standing on the basis of antithesis. Without this concept grasped properly, the reality and the good news of a personal Savior has no place to penetrate.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we must let the importance of the Christian task rest upon us, and become experts of our culture in order to understand and accomplish that task. We must acknowledge our culture of prevailing pantheism and relativism, and stop at nothing to challenge it.
We must developed a spirit of commitment to the task, while retaining a spirit of humility, gentleness, compassion, and perseverance. Humility in light of the fact that we were once also lost, compassion for our audiences who is dealing with despair and tension, gentleness in bringing them face to face with reality, and perseverance to do whatever the Lord calls us in order to reach the world for Him. 
Schaeffer, Francis A. The God Who is There, 2nd ed. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1982.
