Tag Archives: Apologetics

Polemics

Dealing with objections to Christian apologetics

3 Comments

I found this post on the Possible Worlds blog. (H/T Apologetics 315)

He deals with the following five objections:

  1. You can never argue anyone into the kingdom.
  2. Doesn’t the Bible say to stay away from philosophy?
  3. We should do apologetics from the Word of God only.
  4. Apologetics removes the faith component.
  5. Only the select few can get involved in apologetics, therefore I have no reason to do it.

The fifth one, “not everyone has to do apologetics”, is the one I hear the most often from people:

That is simply not true! As Christians we have an obligation to engage in apologetics! 1 Peter 3:15 says, “But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear.”

Peter’s message, in context, is that even in the face of persecution, we may suffer for our good lifestyle in Christ. If this is the case, give every man an answer for why you are doing that. I’m willing to bet Peter’s apologetic went along the lines of his sermon in Acts 2. In this sermon, Peter appealed to fulfilled Old Testament prophecy as well as eyewitness testimony of the Resurrection. Sounds like apologetics to me!

But what about those whose intellectual talents are somewhat lacking? Did Peter really expect them to be able to give a reason? Yes. Inasmuch as one is able, he must present an apologetic for Christ. Suppose one cannot follow complex philosophical arguments. What can he do? He may argue from personal experience or a changed life. He may point someone who is interested in the direction of apologetic resources. In essence, any Christian should learn as much as he is able to learn. Almost every Christian I know is capable of presenting the common-sense cosmological argument (“whatever begins to exist had a cause, the universe began to exist, therefore the universe had a cause”).

Not only is apologetics defensible and important in bringing certain types of people to Christ, it is also commanded of every believer. The Bible never commands the level of skill of an apologist, just that the believer holds and expresses a reason for his hope. The more I study the stronger in faith I become. There are always questions I will be unable to answer, but God has answered so many more in such wonderful ways I just have to trust him!

I hear that objection most from people who think that the Christian life consists of being happy and having the feeling that God does really appreciate you caring about him and trying to serve him effectively. I don’t think that is the right way to have a relationship with another person. You have to get to know them and incorporate their character and goals into your decision making. You accommodate them. You serve them.

I found some more reasons why people don’t do apologetics:

  1. Christians don’t seem to care that Christianity is routinely ridiculed
  2. Christians think that faith means belief in the absence of evidence and argument
  3. Christians are not aware of the tremendous intellectual resources available
  4. Christians are more concerned about being “nice” and “tolerant”
  5. Christians don’t want to take the time to study issues thoroughly

The post has my comments on those reasons.

The fact of the matter is that God’s existence and character are under attack, and what works is reason and evidence. Not feelings, not stories, and not being nice. Anyone can be nice. Christianity needs to be presented as TRUE, (by nice people).

My thoughts on this question are here. This is one of my favorite posts.

I’ve noticed that Christian women are often complaining about how to make men take an interest in them. I think the two best things to do to fix that is to get really good at fiscal conservatism and really good at apologetics. Men want women who are marriage-friendly (fiscally conservative) and who put their own happiness second to defend others (apologetics). That’s what fiscal conservatism and apologetics tells a man about your character. If a woman advocates for redistributing wealth to the poor through government, then she is opposed to traditional male rols (provider/protector) and has no idea how marriage is supposed to work in practice. If a woman makes excuses about why she does not have to know how to defend God’s existence and character, then she doesn’t have the ability to care about the needs and goals of others in relationships. Just because a woman says she wants marriage and to be a mother, it doesn’t mean she actually wants that. She may just want people (big and small) to make her happy but without having to care about what they want.

Commentary

Why Christians should focus on cultural issues as well as evangelism

1 Comment

Scott Klusendorf linked me this article on Facebook, in which he gives five reasons why Christians should not JUST focus on the gospel, but should instead be good at promoting goodness and opposing evil.

Excerpt:

First, it does not follow that because cultural reformers cannot make a culture blameless before God, we shouldn’t try to make it better for the weak and oppressed. I do not know of a single pro-life leader, for example, who argues that cultural reform can save souls eternally; only the gospel does that. The fact that cultural reform cannot get a man to heaven, however, does not mean that it cannot (in many cases through political means) save him from injustice here on earth. In short, pro-life advocates like me do not work for change in culture to save the world from spiritual death, but to save the most vulnerable members of the human family, the unborn, from physical death.

Second, the goal of cobelligerent cultural reform is not necessarily to change the hearts of individuals (whether saved or lost), but to restrain their evil acts. Martin Luther King, Jr., put it well: “It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it can keep him from lynching me, and I think that’s pretty important.”3 The purpose of government, according to Scripture, is not to ensure salvation, but to promote justice (Rom. 13:1‑4). The primary purpose of the church, of course, is to preach the gospel of Christ, but if Christians, collectively, do not also challenge government to fulfill its duty to protect the weak and defenseless, who will?

Third, the notion that “there can be no real cultural impact apart from the transforming power of the gospel of Jesus Christ” sounds good, but it is simply incorrect. Consider the moral evil of slavery in America, which did not end because of mass conversions to Christ. It ended when believers and nonbelievers joined forces to stand against it—and paid for it with the lives of 360,000 Union soldiers. Was the abolition of slavery not a “real” cultural improvement? True, it did not make those who participated right with God, but it did take the physical whips off the backs of oppressed people. That is moral and cultural improvement by any reasonable standard.

Fourth, it is not spiritually unacceptable for Christians to mobilize with non-Christians for causes other than preaching the gospel. Prior to the Civil War, Protestant clergy worked with non-Christians and organized the Underground Railroad to free black slaves. Anyone who thinks that God’s people are wasting their time pursuing social justice may want to take a look at how important it is to God: Jeremiah 5:26‑28; 9:24; Isaiah 1:16‑17, 21‑23; 58:6‑7; 61:8; Psalm 94:1‑23; Proverbs 24:1‑12; Matthew 25:41‑46.

Fifth, why should anyone suppose that pro-life advocacy detracts from the discipline responsibilities of the local church as outlined in Matthew 28? Simply put, the answer to a lack of evangelical fervor for the Gospel is not to withdraw our political advocacy for the weak and vulnerable; it’s to encourage Christians to do a better job presenting the gospel. We don’t have to stop rescuing the innocent to do that.

This is why I try to have a balance of apologetics with other issues. And not just social policy, but fiscal policy and foreign policy. We need to have complete, comprehensive, coherent Christian worldviews. One obvious benefit of this is that we can connect Christianity with any topic when we are talking to others in the workplace, or anywhere that normal conversations occur. And if we study everything very well, people will link our intelligence to our faith. They’ll say “if you’ve put this much thought into economics, then you must have a well-thought-out faith, too”. Being well-rounded makes you more convincing, more influential on moral and cultural issues, and more effective at turning conversations to the gospel.

News

Christian apologists sue City of Dearborn and Carleton University

1 Comment

First, the evil city of Dearborn, Michigan is being sued.

Excerpt:

If you’ve been following this blog for the past two years, you’ve seen Muslim security guards assault our sister Mary Jo Sharp at the Dearborn Arab Festival. You’ve seen Dearborn’s own Corporal Kapanowski assault our sister Negeen. You’ve seen falsified police reports, written by corrupt police officers trying to justify their unlawful arrests. You’ve seen police officers (who take an oath that they will support and defend the Constitution) take us into custody for attempting to hand out copies of the Gospel to Muslims outside the festival. You’ve seen lies from the Mayor, lies from police, and even lies from Christians trying to curry favor with the local Muslims.

For a complete summary of our experience in Dearborn, click here.

Enough is enough. Today, the Thomas More Law Center filed a massive 96-page Complaint against the City of Dearborn. Mayor John B. O’Reilly, Police Chief Ronald Haddad, seventeen Dearborn police officers, and two members of the Arab Chamber of Commerce are officially being sued. If the City of Dearborn refuses to honor the U.S. Constitution, we hope this lawsuit will help persuade them that, so long as Michigan is part of the United States, they have no choice in the matter.

Of course, the City of Dearborn is no stranger to civil rights lawsuits. A Christian wrestling coach sued the City after he was targeted for his faith by a Muslim principal. (The City settled out of court.) Two more Christian teachers at a majority Muslim high school are now suing after being targeted and persecuted for their faith.

And what about Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada?

Excerpt:

Members of an anti-abortion group at Carleton are suing the university for discrimination.

The $225,000 lawsuit filed in Ontario Superior Court Feb. 18 by Carleton students Ruth Lobo and John McLeod claims the university breached its own human rights policies and procedures by refusing to let a campus club called Carleton Lifeline set up a controversial display featuring large images of aborted fetuses and genocide atrocities in the Tory Quad, a high-traffic square at the centre of campus (university officials offered the group space at a different spot).

Claiming the university was trying to censor its message by suggesting the group set up its displays in an alternative location, Carleton Lifeline attempted to set up its display in Tory Quad last October and were arrested by Ottawa police and campus security.

“Carleton University’s decision to have Carleton Lifeline arrested, charged with trespassing and fined was excessive, unjustified and constituted an attempt to bully, intimidate and censor them,” the statement of claim says.

The lawsuit names the university, its president Roseann O’Reilly Runte and three other senior officials.

[…]Lobo, a human-rights major, and McLeod, who’s studying business, claim Carleton breached its fiduciary duty to provide them with a free and open campus environment to discuss and debate controversial ideas and, through its actions, stripped them of their freedom of expression and freedom from discrimination.

As a result, the students say their grades and reputations have suffered.

“Their university experience has been tarnished, their reputation, individually and as a group, has suffered and they have lost their trust in Carleton University’s professors and administrators,” the lawsuit claims.

The pair also claim being arrested and detained last fall infringed on their rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

They are seeking $100,000 in general damages for wrongful arrest and pain and suffering, $100,000 for punitive damages and $25,000 for the Charter violations.

I have an idea. Let’s make more children into Christian lawyers. And then let’s make them work for the Alliance Defense Fund, the Thomas More Law Center, the Homeschool Legal Defense Association, American Center for Law and Justice, The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Institute for Justice, etc. Yes, I know – the children won’t like it. They will prefer to play Nintendo and go to the movies with their annoying friends, (the same as what I wanted when I was a spoiled little brat!). But who cares what they think?