A super 20-minute podcast from Apologetics 315.
The MP3 file is here. (20 minutes)
Topics:
- what is the definition of apologetics?
- what do you mean by defense? a testimony?
- what is the goal of apologetics?
- does apologetics create belief? should it?
- what are offensive and defensive apologetics?
- should Christians fear intellectual opposition to Christianity?
- is apologetics good for believers?
- does apologetics help you to be more confident when witnessing?
- what was the role of apologetics in the Bible?
- what was the role of apologetics in the early church?
- was apologetics central or peripheral to Paul’s ministry?
- does the Bible present Christianity as personal preference or public truth?
- did Jesus appeal to objective evidence to get people to believe him?
- is there a requirement for all Christians to make a defense of their faith?
- should Christians care if non-believers have false beliefs about God?
- does the Bible need to be defended? What does the Bible say about it?
- Is an intellectual approach to evangelism antithetical to faith?
My posts on apologetics advocacy are here:
- does the Bible teach that faith is opposed to logic and evidence?
- the six enemies of apologetic engagement
- why men flee the feminized church
- why won’t Christians defend their faith in public?
These were all quite popular when they were originally posted, so it’s good to re-post them.
Actual arguments and counter-arguments are here, if you want to know the basics. Debates and lectures are here to see how this gets used. Most Christians never even dream that their faith can be debated at Harvard or Columbia or Oxford!
Christianity is a knowledge tradition. It’s not a feelings tradition.
UPDATE: If you’re really good at apologetics, you can debate the top atheists in public, and say things like this:
WINTERY KNIGHT 
I don’t get this preoccupation with arguing about God’s existence. Either you’re healing as Christ did, and demonstrating God’s power in your life and the life of others as he did, or you’re not.
By that, I mean healing yourself and others, like the woman freed from the issue of blood, raising Lazarus from the dead, providing food to feed the multitudes, healing the soldier whose ear Peter had cut off and forgiving those who crucified him. Overcoming death and the grave pretty much meant that Jesus didn’t have to argue or have a pitch man. The proof was incontrovertible. Seeing this, people couldn’t help but believe. And those amazing sermons all added to his credibility. But they’d have meant little if Jesus didn’t demonstrate his teachings through the works outlined in the new testament.
“He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.” That’s a command to believe as he did and to perform works as he did. And Jesus not only said we could do it if we believed; he said we must. Peter and Paul did it. We need to also. And many of these types of healings are going on today.
Heal someone of sin, sickness or death, and you’ll get people’s attention. You won’t have to say anything. The proof will be right there. But if you’re all about is arguing and not about healing, comforting, teaching and leading by example, all you’re going to get is more arguments, which I know you like. But why not be a healer instead? Isn’t that the purpose of being a Christian–to emulate Christ?
He was the good shepherd. And shepherds don’t argue with the sheep. They don’t argue on behalf of the sheep. What they do is watch over them and trust them to God’s protection.
I mean, seriously. You want to prove the existence of God, do as he did.
And as far as atheists are concerned, why bother? They don’t have any power. They don’t have any standing. Why not simply “turn the other cheek”?
LikeLike
Thanks for your comment.
People cannot become Christians unless they know God exists as a matter of fact, not just by blind faith.
Healings could in principle confirm the claim God exists, unless they could be explained away naturalistically.
I cannot do healings or rise from the dead, like Jesus did.
Therefore, I use arguments and evidence instead.
I use arguments and evidence when talking to non-Christians in public settings.
People in the New Testament and the early church also used arguments and evidence.
If you can prove God’s existence by performing healings that convince unbelievers, you may do so.
You can interpret the Bible how you like and do what you like.
I recommend listening to the lecture and reading the articles to get a different view.
You can do what works best for you.
Note: I am a classical cessationist regarding signs.
LikeLike
Apologetics saved my faith at a time when “holding steadfast to the Spirit” alone wasn’t enough. Arguments and evidence have strengthened my faith to the point where I’m eager to engage in conversation with other people who may not believe. I proclaim what I believe, proudly knowing I stand firmly in the center of current philosophy, history and science, something I’ve NEVER been able to confidently do.
Ultimately, the Holy Spirit is the source of conviction in a non-believer, and shows them the ultimate truth. But apologetics can help some get there, particularly those who thrive on discussing science and philosophy to make their points.
If by using apologetics you ultimately “heal someone of sin,” is that not healing power just the same?
LikeLike
I’m glad you wrote that.
I view arguing about the creation, fine-tuning, cambrian explosion, or origin of life, ec. as the equivalent of using a miracle. The miracle really happened, and God did it. I didn’t do it. But I can look at what scientists find to recover evidence that God has acted. It’s like a healing, but you get the evidence from science instead. It’s objective, too. You can use it in public.
LikeLike
Well what can I say? Knowing that I believe what I do because it has compelling supporting evidence keeps me accountable in my day to day life as well. There are times when I don’t want Christianity to be true because I’d like to do some things my own way. All this stuff I’ve been jamming into my head for the last few years has helped solidify what I believe and keep me accountable.
And the most ironic detail about it, is I have an atheist to thank for it, for challenging me on things, and me not having an answer.
LikeLike
This is it. This is the point I am trying to make. We resist the Holy Spirit. But if we can just train ourselves to dialog with atheists and study the arguments and evidence, our minds will change (renewing your mind) and we will be able to do what we really want to do – what we ought to do.
Check out this post on how beliefs are formed. You can’t choose your beliefs out of thin air by an act of will. What you can choose to do is to study the issues. And when you study both sides, your beliefs change. There is no shortcut to faith based on feelings.
LikeLike
Right. I don’t do the healing. God does the healing. But I can know God in a way that enables me to see past the illness, the sin, and see the perfect man. I don’t heal a sick man. I see the well man that has always been there, which is what Jesus did when he healed.
[SNIP]
I healed as a child (a sprained ankle when I was 14 in a half a day) and more serious conditions such as measles. I was never sick as a child. As an adult, I was healed spiritually of seizures, migraine headaches and a frozen shoulder being the most serious. This was all done spiritually, not medically.
That’s my proof that God exists and I add to it every day. So when I meet an atheist, if we have a conversation, I tell them about that and they’re generally very interested. Have I “converted” anyone? I don’t care about that. I know that I have helped numerous people in my community and family by continually seeing them as God sees them. And that, I think, is fulfilling what a Christian mission should be: Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Freely ye have received, freely give.
[SNIP]
LikeLike
You get the last word.
LikeLike
And I’m savoring it.
LikeLike