A Christ Centered Approach to Apologetics

[Papa Zoom]

Apologetics is a discipline of defending the faith (in this case the Christian faith). What I want to explore is how that is to be done in the right way.

There is a formal way, and a less formal way as I understand it. Less formal is what we do here I suppose although more formal approaches may be used. The question for the group is, how ought we to conduct ourselves in a defense of what we believe to be true? What is the best way that is Christ honoring?

I'm of the opinion that this forum is in need of this type of discussion AND, starting with ME, we can all benefit from examining our approach and modeling it after the Spirit of our Lord.

thoughts?

 

[Deborah13]

I don't know if this is what you are looking for but I have watched videos of Michael Brown, a Jewish Messianic believer. He only uses scripture to defend the Gospel. He is always controlled, in other words he never looses it even though sometimes you can see his frustration. He is always gracious and respectful towards the person he is debating, often times a Jewish rabbi, and he is never condescending or haughty.

 

[Papa Zoom]

I don't know if this is what you are looking for but I have watched videos of Michael Brown, a Jewish Messianic believer. He only uses scripture to defend the Gospel. He is always controlled, in other words he never looses it even though sometimes you can see his frustration. He is always gracious and respectful towards the person he is debating, often times a Jewish rabbi, and he is never condescending or haughty.

Exactly what I'm talking about Deborah. Very nice post. We need more of this around here and I include myself in that. I think I know who you're talking about as I listen to his podcasts. Line of Fire radio. He's a former drug addict and now a PhD in theology or something like that.

 

[chessman]

The question for the group is, how ought we to conduct ourselves in a defense of what we believe to be true? What is the best way that is Christ honoring?

Here's some of my thoughts on this topic. Hopefully they are Biblically based (but open to criticism). Let's unpack the following instructions ("oughts"). And yes there are multiple instructions (sorry for the lengthy reply):

1 Peter 3:14-16 (NASB) But even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are blessed. And do not fear their intimidation, and do not be troubled, but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence; and keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame. ​

First, notice where this passage comes from (the broader context). It's some of Peter's instructions ("oughts") on how we who have hope in God (men and women, husbands and wives) should live our Earthly lives while we wait on our afterlife. From the NASB title of this chapter "Godly living": Peter details some things wives should incorporate into their particular "Godly living" (v1-6) and some things husbands should incorporate into their Godly living (v7). [Yes wives have more to do to live Godly lives than husbands. They have 6 verses and we get only 1. I guess husbands can't handle more than one instruction whereas wives can handle six (or more) at a time ]

But then Peter returns to giving everyone (wives and husbands) instructions in v14-16. Apologetics is for everyone who has hope in God, is my point. People who have no hope in God or hope in themselves not God should probably stay away from apologetics. But for the rest of us (women too), it is an ought to our lives, not an optional add on.

1. "You are blessed". A blessing is something that comes TO us who hope in God in this effort of Godly living. We have inherited a blessing (v9) though to Help us (The Helper, the Holy Spirit). Thus, let it (that Blessing) flow through us brothers and sisters to others.

2. Do not fear their intimidation, and do not be troubled. If you've spent much time studying Christian apologists, I'm sure you've heard one or more point out that 1 Peter 3:15 comes in the same sentence as 3:16. They are making the point not to be rude with our apologetics. Which is a true and a valid point, of course. But I've never heard anyone, that I recall, noticing that a portion of verse 14 is also a part of this very long sentence of Peter's. My point is that Peter's instructions include us not fearing intimidation or being troubled in this Godly living effort of apologetics from whoever asks (Atheist or Christian). The way to do that (not fear or be troubled), you ask??? APOPLOGETICS! IF we are prepared with good reasoned answers to the inevitable intimidation and questions, no problem. We'll put them (those that have no hope in God or put hope in themselves) to shame (Peter's word not mine) simply by having prepared reasons, not by rudeness. But more than that, we get to live without fear.

3. sanctify Christ as Lord?
Careful! We are NOT sanctifying Christ through our apologetics. He needs no sanctification. We do! Let's not snip a phrase out of it's context. Who does good apologetics (apologetics done right) sanctify??? Us! How do I know? Because what he really says is "... sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts ...
Also, sanctifying our hearts is a process. Don't expect to ever stop learning and/or being corrected with others' good apologetics in this Godly living process. I've learned a lot here! And yes learned from some that disagree with me. There is no pill that once taken means all our answers are the best reasoned answers, however. It takes work and correction.

4. always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you. Being ready with a defense (an apologetic) includes lots of study, practice and hard work. 'No pain, no gain' type of thing. It takes practice, but so? It's worth the effort. And it's worth it for everyone who asks. Not just to Atheists or Hindus or people of other faiths. But to anyone who asks. Including other Christians! Who knows, maybe their defense is more Biblically reasonable than ours. [which is why I'm here, BTW]. But apologetics toward others is about them first 'asking'. Church member correction/discipline is another subject. And not for everyone to practice either. Apologetics is about answering people's questions, not correcting their doctrines, IMO.

5. give an account

http://biblehub.com/greek/3056.htm
[3056 (lógos) is a common term (used 330 times in the NT) with regards to a person sharing a message (discourse, "communication-speech"). 3056 (lógos) is a broad term meaning "reasoning expressed by words.]
Give them a reasoning expressed by our Biblically based words.

Hope??? Is it 'wishful thinking' or is it something tangible that's based on the evidence of Jesus Christ's (The Logos) resurrection? I say hope is tangible and evidenced. In fact, Hope lives in us.

6. the hope that is in you,
The reason for our hope is in us! It's alive and well in us. It's NOT us, however. Christ IS living in us. Do we hope in Christ for our afterlife or do we hope in us for our afterlife??? I mean really, why DO we hope? Is it because we like going to church and fellowshiping with others and being 'christian' helps us socially??? Or do we have a reason literally living in us to base our hope on??? I've never/ever seen an Atheist convinced of God by looking at us. By the conviction of the blessing of the Holy Spirit flowing through us, sure. But us??? Not!

7. yet with gentleness and reverence;
[any suggestions for me personally here? ]
But address what with reverance and keeping a good conscience means!

http://biblehub.com/greek/4240.htm

reverence to who, the questioner or to God? I say show reverence to God. If you back away from challenging questions to your reasons, are you being reverent to the Hope (capital H) living in you?

8. keep a good conscience

http://biblehub.com/greek/18.htm
Learn what a good conscience means.

9. so that in the thing in which you are slandered, ...

If our apologetic reasons (the thing) for believing are Biblically based, yet slandered anyway (even by another christian), so be it. Our conscience is clear.

 

[joseph lentz]

Point taken Papa Zoom on my part
Thanks

 

[Papa Zoom]

Here's some of my thoughts on this topic. Hopefully they are Biblically based (but open to criticism). Let's unpack the following instructions ("oughts"). And yes there are multiple instructions (sorry for the lengthy reply):

1 Peter 3:14-16 (NASB) But even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are blessed. And do not fear their intimidation, and do not be troubled, but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence; and keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame. ​

First, notice where this passage comes from (the broader context). It's some of Peter's instructions ("oughts") on how we who have hope in God (men and women, husbands and wives) should live our Earthly lives while we wait on our afterlife. From the NASB title of this chapter "Godly living": Peter details some things wives should incorporate into their particular "Godly living" (v1-6) and some things husbands should incorporate into their Godly living (v7). [Yes wives have more to do to live Godly lives than husbands. They have 6 verses and we get only 1. I guess husbands can't handle more than one instruction whereas wives can handle six (or more) at a time ]

But then Peter returns to giving everyone (wives and husbands) instructions in v14-16. Apologetics is for everyone who has hope in God, is my point. People who have no hope in God or hope in themselves not God should probably stay away from apologetics. But for the rest of us (women too), it is an ought to our lives, not an optional add on.

1. "You are blessed". A blessing is something that comes TO us who hope in God in this effort of Godly living. We have inherited a blessing (v9) though to Help us (The Helper, the Holy Spirit). Thus, let it (that Blessing) flow through us brothers and sisters to others.

2. Do not fear their intimidation, and do not be troubled. If you've spent much time studying Christian apologists, I'm sure you've heard one or more point out that 1 Peter 3:15 comes in the same sentence as 3:16. They are making the point not to be rude with our apologetics. Which is a true and a valid point, of course. But I've never heard anyone, that I recall, noticing that a portion of verse 14 is also a part of this very long sentence of Peter's. My point is that Peter's instructions include us not fearing intimidation or being troubled in this Godly living effort of apologetics from whoever asks (Atheist or Christian). The way to do that (not fear or be troubled), you ask??? APOPLOGETICS! IF we are prepared with good reasoned answers to the inevitable intimidation and questions, no problem. We'll put them (those that have no hope in God or put hope in themselves) to shame (Peter's word not mine) simply by having prepared reasons, not by rudeness. But more than that, we get to live without fear.

3. sanctify Christ as Lord?
Careful! We are NOT sanctifying Christ through our apologetics. He needs no sanctification. We do! Let's not snip a phrase out of it's context. Who does good apologetics (apologetics done right) sanctify??? Us! How do I know? Because what he really says is "... sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts ...
Also, sanctifying our hearts is a process. Don't expect to ever stop learning and/or being corrected with others' good apologetics in this Godly living process. I've learned a lot here! And yes learned from some that disagree with me. There is no pill that once taken means all our answers are the best reasoned answers, however. It takes work and correction.

4. always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you. Being ready with a defense (an apologetic) includes lots of study, practice and hard work. 'No pain, no gain' type of thing. It takes practice, but so? It's worth the effort. And it's worth it for everyone who asks. Not just to Atheists or Hindus or people of other faiths. But to anyone who asks. Including other Christians! Who knows, maybe their defense is more Biblically reasonable than ours. [which is why I'm here, BTW]. But apologetics toward others is about them first 'asking'. Church member correction/discipline is another subject. And not for everyone to practice either. Apologetics is about answering people's questions, not correcting their doctrines, IMO.

5. give an account

http://biblehub.com/greek/3056.htm
[3056 (lógos) is a common term (used 330 times in the NT) with regards to a person sharing a message (discourse, "communication-speech"). 3056 (lógos) is a broad term meaning "reasoning expressed by words.]
Give them a reasoning expressed by our Biblically based words.

Hope??? Is it 'wishful thinking' or is it something tangible that's based on the evidence of Jesus Christ's (The Logos) resurrection? I say hope is tangible and evidenced. In fact, Hope lives in us.

6. the hope that is in you,
The reason for our hope is in us! It's alive and well in us. It's NOT us, however. Christ IS living in us. Do we hope in Christ for our afterlife or do we hope in us for our afterlife??? I mean really, why DO we hope? Is it because we like going to church and fellowshiping with others and being 'christian' helps us socially??? Or do we have a reason literally living in us to base our hope on??? I've never/ever seen an Atheist convinced of God by looking at us. By the conviction of the blessing of the Holy Spirit flowing through us, sure. But us??? Not!

7. yet with gentleness and reverence;
[any suggestions for me personally here? ]
But address what with reverance and keeping a good conscience means!

http://biblehub.com/greek/4240.htm

reverence to who, the questioner or to God? I say show reverence to God. If you back away from challenging questions to your reasons, are you being reverent to the Hope (capital H) living in you?

8. keep a good conscience

http://biblehub.com/greek/18.htm
Learn what a good conscience means.

9. so that in the thing in which you are slandered, ...

If our apologetic reasons (the thing) for believing are Biblically based, yet slandered anyway (even by another christian), so be it. Our conscience is clear.

All good stuff. I appreciate the time and thinking that you put into your post. It's right on the money IMO.

I am particularly interested in how we here at CF.net act toward each other (fellow Believers) and others (non believers). My interest goes beyond being a moderator here. God has been working on me in this area for a long time. I'm not always gracious in my replies but I should be. I know I've gotten better in this area but there's still room for growth.

 

[Nathan]

I liked reba's thread she had a while back in the lounge. It was similar to this and I think we could use a lot of those principles in Apologetic.

I like Chessmans' thoughts, and mine are kind of like it, but the way I approach it specifically.

Here is my take on it. As you said it is a discipline. Of course, you cannot do something without first learning about it, however, to try defending the faith - without having a good grasp on it yourself - is a recipe for disaster. So in other words, Apologetic's being a discipline, you have to understand your limitations, and stay within those boundaries.

If, you feel the question of the faith asked is within your boundaries, then by all means proceed. When you do, have an open mind to how they see it. That is not to say you have to believe what they see/say - because if you have proceeded on, that should mean you are well grounded in the faith already. Having an open mind is the concept that you try to view it from their perspective - to understand that they may not be honestly able to see things the way you do.

You have to understand that most of the time a question or statement is going to come across as rude, demeaning, hateful, condescending, dumb, etc. You have to be prepared to deal with the natural thoughts of a man asking a question. I really don't think those prone to anger should engage in Apologetic's. However, I also believe God can use anyone to do His work.

Once you get past their question, it really helps to first ask questions to them, in order to make sure you are truly understanding what they are asking. This can be tricky and as I have recently found out, is much easier to do in person than over the internet. Reason being, you are now truly asking a question, because you truly want to understand their question, and they may take your question as rude, demeaning, etc.

If you can get past this point I think its all down hill. lol

Apologetic's can't be forced. There is no shame in saying you do not know something. Apologetic's should also be treated carefully, because if you engage with someone and you are not grounded in your faith - and they have stronger arguments - then you can be persuaded. I had this happen to me once - never again.

Ravi Zacharias is probably the best Apologetic's person I have ever listened to. Whats so interesting is that he is so thorough. Which is another point. Stay on topic. So many people want to pull off the topic into another area of the faith. They may be well intention, because they may be truly versed in the area they want to talk - while only slightly so in the area the question was asked. They see a connection and so they engage.

I honestly think that when Apologetic's is done correctly it can lead to great things. More and more questions come if the person is truly interested. If they are not, and they are trying to lead you away, or just be rude, you will know soon enough. If they are sincere, then a great conversation can be had. It takes two though - at least.

What I like about this forum is that the questions can be laid out in written form so a person can study them before ever responding. You can even ask a question for clarity before ever responding. You can see the other peoples responses and get a feel for the original question even. It all boils down to "as much as it depends upon you" to talk gracefully with others.

I am a STRONG proponent of understanding your faith well enough to engage. Its good to use your faith not just stick it in your back pocket.

 

[Nathan]

One thing I really forgot to add. When we look at Apolgetics we need to see it as a defending of the faith by us, in our own words. Yes, we should use the Bible, but not just quote/post Bible passages.

That's fine to do, but apologetics is an interaction with a person, it should be a two way street. Just giving them Bible verses does not help them to understand. Think of Paul and other NT writers. They used OT passages and explained the faith from them.

 

[chessman]

Ravi is very effective with people of Eastern type mindsets. Even if they live now in the West.

WLC is effective with intellectual types and philosophy types.

Jim Wallace is effective with historical investigating types.

Lee Strobel with lawyer types.

Greg Koukl with simple reasons types.

Hugh Ross with scientific types.

Etc. etc,

The man on street apologist is effective with _______?

 

[Papa Zoom]

Ravi is very effective with people of Eastern type mindsets. Even if they live now in the West.

WLC is effective with intellectual types and philosophy types.

Jim Wallace is effective with historical investigating types.

Lee Strobel with lawyer types.

Greg Koukl with simple reasons types.

Hugh Ross with scientific types.

Etc. etc,

The man on street apologist is effective with _______?

You've named my favorites. I also like Frank Turek of Cross Examined.

 

[chessman]

You've named my favorites. I also like Frank Turek of Cross Examined.

Yes. He's good for college aged seekers. He spends a huge amount of time debating on college campus in some extremely harsh environments. I think he does hard audiences and takes on their hardest questions intentionally. Talk about no fear. He's not afraid to answer ANY question.

 

[Papa Zoom]

Yes. He's good for college aged seekers. He spends a huge amount of time debating on college campus in some extremely harsh environments. I think he does hard audiences and takes on their hardest questions intentionally. Talk about no fear. He's not afraid to answer ANY question.

Koukl has always been my favorite because of the way he interacts with hostile opponents. He's always gracious. Ravi is a mind blower. I've listened to him for many hours. My brother has met Ravi after writing to Ravi about the death of my brother's son. Ravi included the letter my brother sent in one of his books (I think it was Jesus Among Other Gods). I've read books by nearly all those you've mentioned. They've helped a lot in sorting out my thinking and of course, modeling a Christ honoring approach to defending one's faith.

 

[chessman]

Oz Guniess

John Lennox

Allister McGrath

Oh my (showing my age) .... Mere Christianity...??? You know.

William Demski

Tom Gilson

Dilbert (just kidding)

 

[chessman]

Ravi included the letter my brother sent in one of his books (I think it was Jesus Among Other Gods).

Wow, I remember reading about that or hearing him speak about it (I forget). It's been a while.

Ravi has some of the strongest evidences for God's existence from examples of speaking with world leaders and people of India. His conversion is powerful.

 

[Papa Zoom]

Wow, I remember reading about that or hearing him speak about it (I forget). It's been a while.

Ravi has some of the strongest evidences for God's existence from examples of speaking with world leaders and people of India. His conversion is powerful.

WL Craig is very smart as well but philosophy at the deeper levels leaves me in the dust. I still like to read what WLC has to say but sometimes it takes several readings to follow what he's saying. I usually find that reading any book on apologetics or history or theology usually answers my current questions but introduces a bunch of new ones.

 

[reba]

The man on street apologist is effective with _______?

the other guy on the street

 

[chessman]

WL Craig is very smart as well but philosophy at the deeper levels leaves me in the dust. I still like to read what WLC has to say but sometimes it takes several readings to follow what he's saying. I usually find that reading any book on apologetics or history or theology usually answers my current questions but introduces a bunch of new ones.

I highly recommend his defenders class.

Check out this great Podcast: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/defenders-podcast/id252618196?mt=2

If you have Kindle I can share any of the books i have

 

[Nathan]

The man on street apologist is effective with _______?

I would say "everyone".

Think about it. I know that most apologists have their specialties - but consider the greatest one there is - Jesus. His style was across the board. Of course, He is God, and could do that. But can't the 'man on the street' do so too? Don't we have the same Spirit Christ had given to Him, remember the Jordan?

We do, but not the same mind yet. We have the ability, but not the skill. The power is there, we have to understand how to use it.

I was contemplating this, first thing this morning. I heard a preacher last night saying that the reason the church is dying is because people don't want to do anything. Interesting. I believe its true - in a way. However, it is coupled with the fact that they do not know how to do anything. Follow that to its logical conclusion - they do not think they need to do anything.

Hmmmm - Its not a sense of laziness or rejection, its a result of incomplete discipleship. So the preacher getting upset with the people for not doing anything needs to turn around and look in the mirror.

This passage came to mind this morning;

2 Timothy 3:1-5
But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power.

We have been put into a place where we think its someone else's 'job' to do certain things. We have been led to believe that we are a certain 'member' of the body, and we best not be doing another body parts job.

Do we deny God's power in such a way to make us think He is unable to transform us, and use us, as He see's fit? Have we come to the place where we decide what part of the body we are, and we decide what that body part does? Who's power are we relying on?

Here is the point. Many think they could not be an apologist - or it would only be limited in what they could defend. I think that anyone can be an apologist. You just have to be mature in the faith is all. That's it. Nothing else.

The thing about God's power, is it is beyond human understanding. HE MADE A DONKEY AN APOLOGIST! Don't you think He can do so with you?

 

[Pegasus]

Apologetics is a discipline of defending the faith (in this case the Christian faith). What I want to explore is how that is to be done in the right way.

There is a formal way, and a less formal way as I understand it. Less formal is what we do here I suppose although more formal approaches may be used. The question for the group is, how ought we to conduct ourselves in a defense of what we believe to be true? What is the best way that is Christ honoring?

I'm of the opinion that this forum is in need of this type of discussion AND, starting with ME, we can all benefit from examining our approach and modeling it after the Spirit of our Lord.

thoughts?

You are correct Papa. We should be of like mind in posting; even our differences of opinion.

 

[chessman]

HE MADE A DONKEY AN APOLOGIST!

That's funny. And true.

Don't you think He can do so with you?

He did it once, he can do it again