The Difference

[Papa Zoom]

I can't decide if I'm in the untrained, under-educated, logically challenged, people throwing "proof-text bombs" category or the well educated in the faith, in scripture, in logic, and rhetoric as well as being fully conversant in the arguments against the faith one. Hmmmm, I'm probably in the middle somewhere. ;)

 

[Papa Zoom]

What is the difference between apologetics and witnessing/evangelism?

Oh, that was the question of the OP. !

 

[Free]

According to the article it was 1 Pet. 3:15. https://crossexamined.org/christian-apologetics/

I wonder if a different word is being used?

'and the Lord God sanctify in your hearts. And [be] ready always for defence to every one who is asking of you an account concerning the hope that [is] in you, with meekness and fear; ' 1 Peter 3:15 https://www.bible.com/bible/821/1PE.3.15

'‘Men, brethren, and fathers, hear my defence now unto you;’ — ' Acts 22:1 https://www.bible.com/bible/821/ACT.22.1

I don't know how to compare the two words in their original. I'll have to check my apps.

I skimmed a bit too fast and didn't even see their error. A bit surprising that a good ministry such as them would make that mistake.

 

[Papa Zoom]

I skimmed a bit too fast and didn't even see their error. A bit surprising that a good ministry such as them would make that mistake.

I know I listen to them on the podcast and he's always right on with facts. But I always understood it was first seen in Acts too.

 

[Free]

in most cases apologetic turns in to argument ..my doctrine is Superior than yours on this point i have to agree with willie T

And is any doctrine of Christ superior to the others? There are those on this site who believe that to be a Christian one simply must love the Lord with all their heart and love their neighbour as himself or herself. Such a simple notion can be rejected with a single question: Which Lord or which Christ is one to love? The biblical doctrine of Christ, the Mormon doctrine of Christ, the JW one?

At some point, an honest person must admit that while some ideas, some doctrines, are relatively equal and just different, some really are better than others. But, again, as I point out in the quote you quoted, doctrinal arguments within Christianity are more theological polemics than apologetics. Believing in an inferior doctrine can have serious, if not catastrophic consequences.

This was all settled back on the first page.

 

[ezra]

And is any doctrine of Christ superior to the others? There are those on this site who believe that to be a Christian one simply must love the Lord with all their heart and love their neighbour as himself or herself. Such a simple notion can be rejected with a single question: Which Lord or which Christ is one to love? The biblical doctrine of Christ, the Mormon doctrine of Christ, the JW one?

At some point, an honest person must admit that while some ideas, some doctrines, are relatively equal and just different, some really are better than others. But, again, as I point out in the quote you quoted, doctrinal arguments within Christianity are more theological polemics than apologetics. Believing in an inferior doctrine can have serious, if not catastrophic consequences.

This was all settled back on the first page.

View attachment 5706View attachment 5706

 

[Free]

View attachment 5706View attachment 5706

Not into mature discussion? Then perhaps this is the wrong forum for you.

 

[Papa Zoom]

Dear God, please make them play nice! Thanks

 

[Papa Zoom]

Oh, and thank you for chocolate chip cookies. And Cookie Monster. Even though I'm on a diet and have to have apple sauce for my treat. :/

 

[Willie T]

oi veh!
Apologetics is an orderly and logical presentation of WHY you believe WHAT you believe.

Most of the arguing I have seen here is more like what you have described: the man-made, conjured-up arguments of untrained, under-educated, logically challenged, people throwing "proof-text bombs" at each other while believing they have somehow proven a point. (Which goes to the argument in support of the continuation of miracles.)

Apologetics is generally done properly by people who have been well educated in the faith, in scripture, in logic, and rhetoric as well as being fully conversant in the arguments against the faith. Thus they are prepared "to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in" them.
(1Pe 3:15)


iakov the fool

Then, basically, it sounds like you are saying any opinions given here for one's beliefs, need to be scrapped in favor of, instead, finding a well-written book excerpt or an article by a recognized and proficient author.

This kind of says that unless each of has reached that elevated status of discussion, we are disqualified from espousing the reasons for our beliefs. From 99% of the posts I have seen, none of us makes the grade you suggest should be required for trying to explain our beliefs.

 

[blessedsmithereens]

Having just found and read the articles, I can see that your statement here has nothing to do with my post, which had everything to do with your post. What is your point?

Careful, you're getting personal.

 

[Free]

Careful, you're getting personal.

Not even close to getting personal. I really just don't see your point, so I'm asking for clarification.

 

[UberMink]

As someone reading the article that they shared I'd say, so what? The body of the article is informative. Why quibble over first place or last place.
Besides that, 1 Peter has for years had its I think in the Apologetics community of PhD's .

You read the article correctly blessed. This article below expounds from a different source than The Cross Examined article as to where they arrived at the reference to 1st Peter.

3. A Brief History of Apologetics

[Sic]...THE APOLOGETIC MANDATE IN 1 PETER 3:15
Our survey of New Testament apologetics would not be complete without taking notice of 1 Peter 3:15, which has often been regarded as the classic biblical statement of the mandate for Christians to engage in apologetics Peter instructs believers to “sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense [apologia] to every one who asks you to give an account [logos] for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence.” Three key observations should be made about this text.......Continues at link.

I think you'll also enjoy that article as it sustains the accurate in total information in the The Cross Examined article.

Have a blessed Good Friday and a peace filled Easter.

 

[UberMink]

I can't decide if I'm in the untrained, under-educated, logically challenged, people throwing "proof-text bombs" category or the well educated in the faith, in scripture, in logic, and rhetoric as well as being fully conversant in the arguments against the faith one. Hmmmm, I'm probably in the middle somewhere. ;)

Perhaps those articles of identity were promulgated by one who is seeking peers based on that list being that of a personal inventory regarding their own level of qualifications to address Apologetics.

 

[Papa Zoom]

Perhaps those articles of identity were promulgated by one who is seeking peers based on that list being that of a personal inventory regarding their own level of qualifications to address Apologetics.

I'm definitely in the middle somewhere. But I'm learning!

 

[Papa Zoom]

You read the article correctly blessed. This article below expounds from a different source than The Cross Examined article as to where they arrived at the reference to 1st Peter.

3. A Brief History of Apologetics

[Sic]...THE APOLOGETIC MANDATE IN 1 PETER 3:15
Our survey of New Testament apologetics would not be complete without taking notice of 1 Peter 3:15, which has often been regarded as the classic biblical statement of the mandate for Christians to engage in apologetics Peter instructs believers to “sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense [apologia] to every one who asks you to give an account [logos] for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence.” Three key observations should be made about this text.......Continues at link.

I think you'll also enjoy that article as it sustains the accurate in total information in the The Cross Examined article.

Have a blessed Good Friday and a peace filled Easter.

Great link BTW. Very interesting reading. I highly recommend!

 

[Jim Parker]

Then, basically, it sounds like you are saying any opinions given here for one's beliefs, need to be scrapped in favor of, instead, finding a well-written book excerpt or an article by a recognized and proficient author.

A proficient author recognized by whom?

Again, it is not about opinions about what the Bible means.
It is about giving good reason for your faith.

Those are two very different things.

 

[Papa Zoom]

A proficient author recognized by whom?

Again, it is not about opinions about what the Bible means.
It is about giving good reason for your faith.

Those are two very different things.

Good reasons for the faith given in a logical and well-reasoned way - which is what Paul did on Mar's Hill. There are plenty of books that help us learn to give good reasons for the faith and to present them in a logical manner.

Greg Kokul of str.org has a lot of helpful articles and a podcast as well (his book Tactics is a good read for anyone seeking to understand logical arguments and how to utilize them as tools in our conversations).

Some books are too heady like WL Craig's book Reasonable Faith. I'd have to look up others to see which one's I'd recommend. But I've learned a lot about using proper arguments backed with reason and thought by reading books and listening to those who have studied such things. As you know, arguments from the heart don't carry the day the way an argument from knowledge can.

 

[Jim Parker]

Good reasons for the faith given in a logical and well-reasoned way - which is what Paul did on Mar's Hill. There are plenty of books that help us learn to give good reasons for the faith and to present them in a logical manner.

Greg Kokul of str.org has a lot of helpful articles and a podcast as well (his book Tactics is a good read for anyone seeking to understand logical arguments and how to utilize them as tools in our conversations).

Some books are too heady like WL Craig's book Reasonable Faith. I'd have to look up others to see which one's I'd recommend. But I've learned a lot about using proper arguments backed with reason and thought by reading books and listening to those who have studied such things. As you know, arguments from the heart don't carry the day the way an argument from knowledge can.

A good place to start might be the Handbook of Christian Apologetics by Kreeft and Tacelli.

 

[Papa Zoom]

A good place to start might be the Handbook of Christian Apologetics by Kreeft and Tacelli.

That is one I do have. I'll have to crack it open again!