We need to rethink how we do apologetics

At Bible College, apologetics was the module that everybody wanted to take. It was uncomfortably alluring in that it always left you feeling really good about what you believed. With just a sprinkling of smug self-righteousness, you often left class thinking,

“Wow. We really do have all the answers, don’t we!”

And that’s a nice feeling. It’s assuring, comforting, enchanting – even powerful. Sometimes you left and wanted to walk down the Highstreet to test it out. You wanted to duke it out and stretch your newly built ‘reason-muscles’. You wanted a fight. Sounds like a healthy attitude for a Christian, right?

In the case of where I was taught, we also left thinking things like,

“Wow. Kant really was a dummy, Foucault was just unhinged, Rousseau killed education, Plato was a nothing but a nationalist, and Hegel was such a sell-out.”

It wasn’t just that we had all the answers, it was like we understood everything about everyone better than anyone. It wasn’t just seeing the world through Jesus’ eyes as redeemed, Kingdom-people – it was like we really were smarter than everybody. It was almost like being prepared for war.

If I could describe my apologetic training in one word it would be combative.

Combatalegitcs

And this makes sense doesn’t it? Apologetics now sits firmly in the field of Western, analytical, dialectic philosophy. It’s about winning the arguments, shifting the burdens of proof, and erecting an indestructible worldview which towers above all others. It’s as if we could ‘defeat’ people into the Kingdom of God.

Through the mechanics of deductive reasoning against a backdrop of postmodernism, we perfected the craft of taking people down and grinding their worldviews to dust. And, in the case of ‘presuppositionalism’ assuming that drifting alongside the wreckage of an unbeliever’s now mangled worldview, would suddenly make them want to hop on our ‘leak-free’ boat instead.

Is it possible that we have taken ‘always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have’ (1 Pt. 3:15) to be ‘always be prepared to wipe the floor with an unbelievers life – whether they asked you to or not’?

Whoooaahhh Tim, I didn’t learn that way!

Ok, I’m being somewhat dramatic. Not every apologist does this. In fact, if you look at the best of them, such as the late Ravi Zacharias, they are able to speak the truth in love; engaging with arguments without pulling apart the person they are speaking to. They empower people to think for themselves.

The thing is, even evidenced in the best, I still think that we largely treat our apologetics as combative tools.

The arenas we witness apologetics happening most clearly is the university debate forum. Those are the videos we watch, and the techniques played out in the sermons we hear, and the books that we read. The more organic zones, however, such as after class conversations, YouTube comments, or even chatting over dinner with friends, don’t fit the debate forum. But with that as our blueprint, it becomes all too easy to try and force a communication shape that would better fit a debate than a conversation. We find ourselves in a battle-ready posture, firmly on one side, with a memorised set of deductive points to prove. In the ugliest of these, we also try to take on the role of moderator as well. The tone changes into something uncomfortable, and we change into something quite alien.

Whenever there’s an opponent, there’s fear

Going back to Bible college, there always seemed to be an opponent. This wasn’t just in our apologetics classes, it was through youth work modules, counselling courses, even biblical theology units. Everything was taught with an underlying opponent, or even an enemy in mind.

This enemy wasn’t the devil, or even our own sinfulness – it was something like secular post-modernism. Because we saw the world soaked in relativism, we had to arm ourselves with not only the truth, but also the best epistemological delivery methods to fire that truth into our culture. It really did feel like preparing for war.

The problem with this is that it’s really hard to love the people you’re training to shoot at.

If you always assume an opponent, then there’s an underlying fear that they could get you. There’s something we’re needing to defeat, because if don’t, bad stuff will happen to us. It could just be that we’re only worried about them self-destructing their own souls, but is that really it?

Is it, perhaps, that we are afraid of our culture’s eroding morality, wanning grasp on reality, or diminishing favouritism for Christianity? Are we afraid that a sinful world is just going to get more sinful, and that Christianity, as a result will become more marginalised or persecuted?

What was it we think we were promised?

The goal is always gospel

We live in a broken world. We weren’t promised anything else this side of Heaven. We were told, by nobody less than Jesus Himself, that we were going to be persecuted. Were you expecting something different?

The goal is to share the good news of Jesus. Going back to 1 Peter, we’re told to have a reason for our hope. You don’t need hope in a sorted world – you need it in a broken one.

The purpose of our apologetics is to point people to Jesus. That’s it. That’s the only goal.

We need to stop treating evangelism like war, unbelievers as opponents, or apologetics like a weapon.

We need to lead with love. Do we need to list off the amount of times we are instructed to love our enemies (Matt. 5:43-48; Lk. 6:27; Rom. 12:14, 20; 1 Pt. 3:9), our brothers and sisters (Jn. 13:34; Col. 3:12-14; 1 Jn. 4:21), and our neighbours (Lev. 19:18; Matt. 7:12; 22:36-40; Mk. 12:31; Rom. 13:8-10; Gal. 5:14; Jam. 2:8)? Even in 1 Peter 3:15 we’re told to give the reason for our hope ‘with gentleness and respect’. It’s just not ok to ignore this enormous theme of the Bible, but again it’s really hard to love the people you’re training to shoot at. It’s even harder when you’re pulling the trigger.

We can’t do apologetics through fear. It just doesn’t work that way. If there is underlying fear in how you engage apologetics – then it’s just not going to work.

So, don’t be afraid.

Don’t be afraid of the conversation. It might take years. It might take many strange turns. Embrace it. Have it.

Don’t be afraid of their choices. It’s not your job to get someone into Heaven, it’s your job to point them towards Jesus.

Don’t be afraid of being shaken. You’re a human, you’re not the Holy Spirit, and feeling doubtful is not a sin.

Don’t be afraid of ‘I don’t know’. Once again – you’re human, not God. You’ll find the conversation goes a lot better if you don’t assume you are the de facto fount of all knowledge.

Don’t be afraid of uncertainty. You don’t know how every little detail will turn out with the world, the law, the Church, or the person you’re speaking to. You don’t need to – you just need to love Jesus and love people.

Don’t be afraid of compassion. You’re called to love people – so love them and lead with that. Don’t be suspicious of yourself for caring for someone that you disagree with.

Don’t be afraid of the Bible. It’s your most important communication from God. Don’t be afraid of it, apologetic for it, or disrespectful of it. Use it – believe me people are expecting you to.

Don’t be afraid of prayer. Bring God into the conversation directly. Ask the person what they’d like you to pray for and do it.

Don’t be afraid of God working in the lives of others. He got there before you did – so what about asking an unbeliever something like ‘have you asked God about it yourself?’ You might be surprised at what happens next!

Don’t be afraid of Christianity. It is a religion. Sorry, but it is. And people are also interested in our rituals and our beliefs. Embrace them and share them.

Don’t be afraid of Jesus. Even if you are actually a scientist with research to your name, or a philosopher with an encyclopaedic knowledge of logical fallacies – make the main thing the main thing. You believe in Jesus. Say so. Say so more than you say anything else. Don’t be afraid of talking about Him more than you make arguments. Tell people about Him. Tell people about Him. Tell people about Him. That’s apologetics.

Photo by Frank Busch on Unsplash