Mentoring

A friend of mine is learning apologetics, here’s what she is using to learn

32 Comments

The woman I am mentoring the most energetically in apologetics sent me this list of resources below. I was so impressed by how disciplined she is that I wanted to post it.

This is what she does every day:

  • William Lane Craig’s Defenders podcasts (1 or 2 a day)
  • Bible in a year (a few chapters as per the schedule)
  • Read/listen through 6 chapters of the Bible, 20 times
  • Is God Just a Human Invention? by Morrow and McDowell (a few chapters per day)
  • True U DVDs (all 3 volumes) by Focus on the Family (one episode per day)
  • Knowing God by J. I. Packer (one chapter per day)
  • Knowledge of the Holy by A. W. Tozer (one chapter per day)
  • Signature in the Cell by Stephen C. Meyer (one chapter per day)

In addition to that, she is on chapter 3 of Scott Klusendorf’s “The Case for Life”. We are also working our way through “Money, Greed and God” by Jay W. Richards, we are on chapter 4 there.

She has books, podcasts, and DVD lectures in there. I also got her some debates on DVD to see what the other side can say. I got her the Lennox-Dawkins debate from the Oxford Museum of Natural History and the Craig-Hitchens debate at Biola University.

When we started out, I was trying to go over the chapters with her to get her started, but now she is busy learning these things on her own. I didn’t even know about most of this stuff that is on her list.

So here are some points I want to make about this.

  1. I think it’s good for Christians to study hard subjects and get good jobs so they have money to spend on books, lectures and DVDs. Not only can you loan out books and show DVDs to groups, but you when you get the resources for yourself, you can learn from them and share what you learn with anyone who is interested. They’ll be more interested in hearing it from you than reading a whole book anyway.
  2. I also think it’s good for Christians to be like this woman. She is interested in apologetics because she had a co-worker who asked her a lot of questions. She decided to answer his questions rather than to attack him personally for his unbelief, or punt to faith not needing reasons or evidence. So she started to look for answers on her own, and then I came along to guide her search, provide materials and practice with her.
  3. She is shy and not used to speaking up or disagreeing with others. So we are spending time discussing these materials and also debating issues. When we discuss a chapter, I highlight the three parts that are the most useful and relevant for debates, and try to show her the structure of the argument. She learns better when we discuss the material and when we practice debating it. I ask her – what would you say if I said this to you? And she answers. Role-play is good for learning apologetics.

So those are my three points.

I would just urge you all to be on the lookout for people who are smart and want to learn more about how to give an answer to anyone who asks them for a reason for their hope. If you are looking for a mentor, then pray that God will send you a mentor. If you want to be a mentor, pray that God will send you someone to mentor.

32 thoughts on “A friend of mine is learning apologetics, here’s what she is using to learn”

  1. Sounds great, Wintery. I would definitely add Koukl’s Tactics to this list. It is essential for anybody interested in engaging these issues, I think, but could be an absolute lifesaver in increasing the communication effectiveness of a person who is naturally shy. If you don’t win the argument in a winsome way then you have lost the person, and winning the person is the real goal. Tactics is a great resource to help one win both.

    Like

    Reply

  2. This is definitely above and beyond what most people do. The only other thing I’d want to squeeze in there is time spent learning the types of fallacies, so she can spot them easily and address them convincingly. It’s important to know how to address specific existing arguments, but it’s just as important to be able to deftly handle new ones she might come across.

    Unfortunately, I don’t have any reading suggestions on that. I’m kind of looking for something along these lines myself. I can spot faulty reasoning pretty well, but becoming familiar with the “technical” terms for the specific fallacies, and the subtleties of when one is happening instead of or along side of another is something I’m still working on. I mostly make return trips to Wikipedia to look over the definitions there, but I’m hoping to find some kind of really good collection of critical thinking books.

    Like

    Reply

  6. “Scaling the Secular City” by J. P. Moreland and “Mere Christianity” by C.S. Lewis were what got me interested in apologetics. I’m currently reading the Francis Schaeffer Trilogy (“The God Who is There”, “He is There and He is Not Silent” and “Escape From Reason”} put out by Crossway.

    Like

    Reply

    1. I’ve read all three of those, and I think Moreland’s book was key for me. I taught that chapter by chapter in 1997 when I was teaching apologetics in my parents’ basement.

      I have the 5-volume Complete Francis Schaeffer, but it’s just OK. Lewis is my least favorite – ok for beginners.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  7. 1. Hopefully, she is following this blog. 2. If she is shy, have her try to mimic WLC’s joyful, Holy-Spirit driven, delivery of her message. Smiling a lot and being joyful in her responses might help overcome her shyness. 3. An occasional classic Christian sermon might be good reading material – here is one possible site, but there are others: http://www.newsforchristians.com/classics.html

    I’m going to follow your mentoring philosophy – thanks, WK!

    Like

    Reply

    1. She has been following the blog for some time because someone she knew from church sent her things I wrote.

      She loves WLC! She listens to his podcasts.

      You just have to look around and pick the person who most wants to make a difference. Then mentor him or her.

      Like

      Reply

  8. On a slightly unrelated topic, WK, do you have any advice for apologists who are suffering from – for want of a better word -burn-out? It seems pretty common, but its never really discussed much.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Wow, not for me! I think it might be good to try to find something new that you have never looked at before and just read it. Are you familiar with Stephen Meyer’s origin of life and Cambrian explosion stuff? There are lectures you can watch on that. Or maybe a William Lane Craig debate – like Craig/Hitchens (it’s on YouTube). I find J. Warner Wallace podcasts especially fun.

      Like

      Reply

    2. Andy, for what it’s worth, I suffer apologetics burnout from time to time and I just step away for a few days or more, read the Bible, focus on relational things, read about the persecuted Church, and retreat to fellow believers only. Every soldier earns his furlough, and this goes for Truth warriors too! God Bless!

      Like

      Reply

  9. No secular reading so your friend can actually address the topic? This is shameful. How is she going to be a good witness when she can’t peer outside the apologetic echo chamber?

    Like

    Reply

    1. Well, for the other side we like to focus on debates. So we watched the Lennox/Dawkins debate and she also has Craig/Hitchens and Craig/Flew on DVD as well. We are just starting out now, so I think it’s best for her to encounter the other side in a debate situation, where she can hear both sides from their own lips.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Plus, most Christian apologetics books have all the major secular-atheist arguments presented in them. If they didn’t, then what would be the purpose of their presentations for defensive apologetics? My experience with the vast majority of secular and atheistic apologetics (particularly those of the New Atheists) is that they are long on assertion and ad hominem attacks, and short on deep philosophical thought and peer-reviewed support.

        The “old atheists” were somewhat different, and those might be worthy reads. The New Atheists are just ticked off at God (and really bad at science – I know, I know, the universe created itself, pass the tissues so we can all cry at the miracle of it) – nothing “new” there, move along please. They are the brownshirts of secular/atheism – might makes right, let’s sue everyone so they think like us. :-)

        That’s one reason that I suggested the classic Christian sermons. Those were delivered prior to the enveloping fog of post-modernism, and this is the main reason that they, like the old atheist and even absurdist writings, were clear, thoughtful, and deep.

        Like

        Reply

          1. Correct. I’m thinking that some good secular undertakings might be in researching Bertrand Russell’s life and philosophy, his mathematical works (including what he attempted with Whitehead in Principia Mathematica, in contrast to Christian apologetics on logic), and even, how Kurt Gödel’s (first)Incompleteness Theorem kind of put those attempts to bed (and how this theorem might relate to a Christian worldview), his life and most interesting death, and his ontological proof that built on Leibnitz’s; Hume and Paley would be fun to contrast; maybe some of the fictional works of Dostoyevsky, and a general survey of absurdism.

            I’m sure that there are many good works from those eras, but I would not look at much of anything after the 1930’s – and I would go back a long way from that era. I’ve mixed some theists in here, obviously, but usually one can find their contemporary counterparts pretty easily.

            Like

      2. Why not just read a science book on Evolution, a history book on Ancient Judea, a Philosophy book on moral values? Why apologize for the writings of non-scientific people, thousands of years ago? How is Faith impacted – at all – by any modern scientific discovery?

        Like

        Reply

        1. Well the faith of atheism, for example, has been falsified by modern science. Any of the following discoveries will do the job: origin of the universe, cosmic fine-tuning, origin of life, Cambrian explosion. So that’s one faith that is not compatible with science. Theism has no problem with science, though.

          Regarding evolution, that’s been falsified by the origin of life and the Cambrian explosion, so it’s just blind faith at this point. Theism is fine with the origin of life and the Cambrian explosion, because we have a Programmer on hand to do the programming that is required to generate the information in the time available.

          And atheists themselves think that morality is nonsense on atheism – morality is not rationally grounded on atheism. It’s more blind faith. Theism has a moral lawgiver, so that grounds morality rationally.

          I think if you like science, philosophy and morality, then be a theist. If you sort of want to make up your own morality based on personal preferences, and put happy feelings above logic and truth, then be an atheist.

          Like

          Reply

          1. There is no way atheism has been falsified. I think you are grossly over-reaching as many apologists are wont to do – on both sides of the culture war. Evolution is a cornerstone of biology and religious apologetics won’t undermine it. Try as you might. And morality is a complex issue, debated vigorously among all philosophers.
            Apologists tend to look for answers, and not revel in the questions. We are only 300 years or so into the Modern Age. And perhaps, we will be looked on as primitive idiots 2000 years from now. Claiming absolute truths and thinking you can find a single answer for everything seems woefully desperate to me.
            I’d encourage your friend to learn about the world. All of it, not a narrow set of call-and-responses by apologists.
            It smacks of, as I said, desperation, to think one can become well versed in Biology, Physics, History, Bible Criticism, Chemistry, Geology, and all the relevant disciplines apologists dare to tread – and then come to the opposite conclusion of the general consensus.
            You mention the Cambrian Explosion. How do you know it happened at all? What body of experts do you cite? Surely you don’t have personal experience with the CE? So how do you know it happened at all?
            Let me suggest you know about it because of scientists – but then you come to the opposite conclusion of the majority of the same people you cite (who did the actual leg work and data collection) and declare it evidence against Evolution? It’s simply bizarre! How do you know anything about Evolution if you’ve only read apologetic literature? But if you have read the science, why don’t you understand it?
            It’s as if I can comment on the Bible after only have read atheist literature – but feel I can comment on translations, interpolations, theodicies, and all the finer points of the Bible. Would you think I could do that after having listened to a few debates and read atheist apologists work? I hope you’d say “no”!
            I’d be willing to focus on one or two points with you or one of your followers in a more structured setting, if you are willing.
            I enjoy getting my hands dirty in this culture war.

            Like

          2. Looks like you got someone’s BP up, WK: shame on you for presenting facts, evidence, science, philosophy, and logic to refute the atheistic blind faith! The universe created itself, I tell you! It has not been refuted! We can only accept the parts of science that conform to my naturalistic presuppositions! Proof by appeal to authority! Proof by ad hominem! Proof by majority! Might makes right! (Can we get this translated into German? :-))

            Like

  11. I’m curious what the debates you recommend seeing are. I’ve watched a number of debates on youtube but nothing systematically organized. It would be nice to have a list of high quality debates to go through.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to David Cancel reply