ON APOLOGETICS: A CASE FOR CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS

I may or may not have discovered (after I finished this paper) that I was did not, in fact, required to write it. Oh the importance of reading the syllabus. 

     The  apostle Peter tells us in his epistle "But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect" (1 Peter 3:15). In the various theological disciplines available to Christians today, apologetics serves as a way to become equipped to know and articulate this reason. "Jesus himself was an extraordinary source for the apologetic impulse in Christianity."
     This essay will serve to present a further case for Christian apologetics. This will be done by by defining, presenting and responding to critiques, and by showing the application for evangelism today. The goal of this essay is to show that apologetics is an appropriate endeavor for the believer to pursue in order to become an equipped, competent, and faithful witness to Jesus Christ.

Apologetics

         We are told in the epistle found at the end of the New Testament, to "contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God's holy people" (Jude 1:3b). Another word for contend is defend, and "essentially apology means a defense." Specifically, Christian apologetics is to make a defense for the doctrinal claims of the Christian faith. "There can be no valid apologetics that does not begin and end in theology."
     "The very word would suggest that anapologia is the primary narrative testament of faith," reiterating what was stated before from 1 Peter.   Apologetics naturally incorporates reason, and thus seeks "to integrate faith and reason."
     Though the proximate goal of a Christian apologist is to provide reasons, grounds, evidences, and arguments for the claim that the Christian worldview is at least as rational as all the worldviews with which it competes, the ultimate goal is to enable people to thrive in God's garden as fully mature "plants" that give glory to God by flowering in the way that God intended.
     The goal of apologetics is to communication "the present generation in terms that they can understand." Therefore, "contemporary apologetics must be presuppositional, rational, relational, and plausible."  One contemporary apologist had four key facts to his theology of apologetics, "the centrality of truth, the need for fair argument, the comparison of worldviews and the art of persuasive communication." We must also "learn to artfully manage the details of dialogue."

Critiques

     "Resistance to apologetics has arisen not only from outside the Christian Church, however, but also from within it."  There is something wrong when people within the church begin to ignore ertain verses which command us to love the Lord our God with our mind (Luke 10:27). The main claim that critiques of apologetics rest on, rest on a misinterpretation of Paul's words in 1 Corinthians that his message and preaching "were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power" (1 Corinthians 2:4). However, later in 2 Corinthians Paul tells us that "since, then, we know what it is to fear the Lord, we try to persuade others" (2 Corinthians 5:11).
     Other "problems of plausibility for Christianity have been created by such factors as conflicts with science and a history characterized by racism, sexism, environment degradation, religious persecution, and imperialism."   Those who would recognize these factors as hindrances for Christianity, swing to a side of tolerance and compromising which is equally inhibits a proper understanding of the gospel.

Response

     What must be said initially is that any critique of using apologetics, is employing their own apologetic for their conviction. The "moment one tries to share an enthusiasm with someone else or commend an idea to another person one has entered the realm of apology."  Once this has been acknowledge, all "who accepts reason as a guide must be consistent in following where it leads." A crucial step each person must take is "detach oneself from introspective speculation in order to arrive at unbiased logical analyses."
     In response to certain critiques based on Colossians, that we should see to it that no one takes us captive by philosophies which are according to human wisdom (Colossians 2:8), "we must not allow the doctrine of human depravity to eclipse the biblical significance of the imago Dei."  Rather, we should insist that "reason is a friend to faith."  Without reason, faith would be blind, which is not how the author of Hebrews would define faith (Hebrews 11:1). "The raising of questions and the pursuit of truth constitute the only alternative to blind faith and self-delusion."
     In light of the fact that "the Church's central claims are no longer seen as binding on all persons [but] rather, the Catholic worldview is reinterpreted in terms of opinion," we must acknowledge we there is a specific apologetic task staring us in the face.   "The rise of, what has been called, 'the new atheism', and the increasing secularization of Western society has made the need for a contemporary, reasoned defense of Christian belief and practice a matter of urgency."
     Apologists have to duty to show the Christian faith "to be far more reasonable and consistent than other competing worldviews."  The alternative is heartbreaking. "It is anguishing to witness young people jettison the faith."  Therefore, "doctrinal instruction, apologetic instruction, and ministry experience will help adolescents grown in their understanding of faith."
     We must also "recognize the complex and elusive chain of events that brings us to the act of faith" in order to properly understand our specific apologetic calling.  One of the most important factors existing within this chain of events is in regards to the concept of truth. To this idea we now turn our attention

Truth

     Concerning apologetics, "the first challenge is simply that of understanding our society."   In the society in which we live, we experience overtones of postmodernism which implies relativism. "In the postmodern age, the apologetic task must first establish the objective, absolute nature of truth and the essential reliability of reason before a comparison of truth claims can be fruitful." J. Schutz has claimed that "because we are compelled by the unchanging and universal truth of the gospel, Christians need to work out a revised method for presenting that gospel to a world that has lost its grasp of the nature of truth."
     Each believer, and every person for that matter, must initially have a gasp on the notion of truth before once can proceed in any conversation. "We cannot believe such [truth claims] if we are not first committed to the truth enterprise itself."  This specific question of the nature of truth "is one of the most important questions in apologetics."
     Historically, "Christian apologetics has been preoccupied with the question of the truth of Christianity."  That is, are Christian doctrine claims objective, ultimate, and absolute? When addressing this question, we must notice that the fact "that there is an apologetic element in the New Testament cannot be denied."   This "apologetic is essentially an apologetic of the truthfulness of the Christian religion, and consequently presumes the theistic system of the Old Testament."
     After we are convinced of the truthfulness Christianity offers, we are commanded and compelled to share this life-saving and life-giving information. This process is known as evangelism. To this process we now turn our attention.

Evangelism

     Stephen Bullivant has commented that "evangelization is an urgent and daunting task for the Church today."   One of the reasons for this, is that for so long relational evangelism was "the key to successful youth ministries; but today apologetics is gaining new traction."   If this is the case, we need to have means for learning apologetics, and encouragement for doing so.
     In promoting apologetics, we must never raise it any higher than the other apologetic disciplines. We must humbly agree that "the evangelist preaches the gospel, and the apologist defends it, but it is God who enables it to take root in a human soul and to yield the fruit of confident Christian commitment."  As Glenn Siniscalchi has recommended, we should "began with establishing God's existence, the human need for God, and then argue for the historical credibility for Jesus' divinity."
     "There is a dynamic movement of the intellect toward Infinite Being necessarily inscribed in every act of knowing." Therefore, every apologetic conversation should naturally lead to an open door for sharing the gospel. "Apologetic activity is built into the foundations of the apostolic witness."

Conclusion

     "Both the theistic and the atheistic explanations of the world involve claims to knowledge."  There are tensions which arise from competing claims to what is true, and one reason for renewing an "interest in apologetics is that apologetics mediatesintellectual tensions."
         As we embrace apologetics, we must remember that "neither human wisdom nor empirical signs were an adequate substitute for the clear proclamation of God's Word."   The Bible presents a truthful compressive account of all of reality. Therefore, "given that the Christian faith has a stable core, the general task of apologetics is now clear enough, to wit, defending that stable core."
        While we humbly acknowledge that "external apologetics will not convert nonbelievers;  Christian theology tells us that only the Holy Spirit can do that," we also breathe a sigh of relief in light of God's sovereignty.   Louis Markos has said that "just as it is not the doctor but the drug prescribed by the doctor that heals the patient, so it is the gospel itself."
     As was shown earlier, the Christian who adopts such a Bible-centered apologetic, however, must prepare himself for intense criticism, even from fellow Christians.  In spite of this, we must remember that "the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth" (2 Timothy 2:25-26).

Bibliography 

Beckwith, Francis J., William Lane Craig, and J. P. Moreland. To Everyone an Answer: A Case         for the Christian Worldview. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2004.

Blakkolb, D. “Apologetics for the Next Generation. Francis Schaeffer’s Apologetic Method:         Analyzed, Critiqued, and Defended.†Master’s thesis, Denver Seminary, 2002.

Burson, Scott R., and Jerry L. Walls. C. S. Lewis & Francis Schaeffer: Lessons for a New         Century from the Most Influential Apologists of Our Time. Downers Grove: InterVarsity         Press, 1998.

Davison, Andrew. Imaginative Apologetics: Theology, Philosophy, and the Catholic Tradition.         Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2011.

Dembski, William A. and Jay Wesley Richards. Unapologetic Apologetics: Meeting the         Challenges of Theological Studies. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2001.

Green, R. “Developing individuative-reflective faith in adolescents through doctrinal and         apologetic teaching and ministry experience.†Master’s thesis, Denver Seminary, 1994.

Guarino, Thomas. “Apologetics, Unapologetically.†Review of A History of Apologetics, by         Avery Cardinal Dulles.First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion & Public Life,         March 1, 2006.

Hanna, Mark M. Crucial Questions in Apologetics. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1981.

Horne, Brian. “Imaginative Apologetics: Theology, Philosophy, and the Catholic Tradition.†        Review of Imaginative Apologetics: Theology, Philosophy, and the Catholic Tradition,         by Andrew Davidson. International Journal for the Study of the Christian Church, July         27, 2012.

Imbert, Tannick. “The End of Reason: New Atheists and the Bible.†European Journal of         Theology 22 (2013): 50-64.

Kreeft, Peter and Ronald K. Tacelli. Pocket Handbook of Christian Apologetics.Downers Grove:                InterVarsity Press, 2003.

Lundquist, M. “The Apologetic of C.S. Lewis as an Art and a Science.†Master’s thesis, Denver         Seminary, 1958.

Markos, Louis. “Heart at Work.†Review of Mere Apologetics: How to Help Seekers and         Skeptics Find Faith, by Alister E. McGrath. Touchstone, January 1, 2013.

Norton, Christ. “The Return of Reasons: Apologetics makes a comeback in youth ministry.†        Christianity Today 55 (2011) 15.

Quinn, Philip L. “Humble Apologetics: Defending the Faith Today.†Review ofHumble         Apologetics: Defending the Faith Today, by John G. Stackhouse Jr.Journal of Religion,         October 1, 2003.

Ramm, Bernard. “The Apologetic of the Old Testament: The Basis of a Biblical and Christian         Apologetic.†Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society 4 (1958): 15-20.

           . Types of Apologetic Systems: An Introductory Study to the Christian Philosophy         of Religion. Wheaton: Van Kampen Press, 1953.

Rausch, Thomas. “A History of Apologetics.†Review of A History of Apologetics, by Avery         Dulles.Theological Studies, September 1, 2006.

Reid, J. K. S. Christian Apologetics. : Hodder and Stroughton, 1969.

Rickard, G. “The Burden of Proof Between Theism and Atheism.†Master’s thesis, Denver                        Seminary, 1999.

Schutz, J. “Philosophical and Apologetic Issues in Postmodernist Epistemology.†Master’s                thesis, Denver Seminary, 1997.

Siniscalchi, Glenn B. “Postmodernism and the Need for Rational Apologetics in a Post-Conciliar         Church.†Heythrop Journal 52 (2011): 751-771.

Stackhouse, John G. Jr. Humble Apologetics: Defending the Faith Today. New York: Oxford         University Press, 2002.

Taylor, James E. Introducing Apologetics: Cultivating Christian Commitment. Grand Rapids:         Baker Academic, 2006.

Whitcomb, John C. Jr. “Contemporary Apologetics and the Christian Faith: Part II: Christian         Apologetics and the Divine Solution.†Bibliotheca Sacra 134 (1977): 195-202.