Introducing Apologetics

Cultivating Christian Commitment

Taylor, James E.

• Publisher: Baker Academic
• Year: 2006
• ISBN:
  9781441206619
• Topic: Teologia e religione
• Subtopic: Teologia cristiana

Questions about the truthfulness of Christianity deserve thoughtful, balanced, and reasonable answers. James Taylor provides a fresh, comprehensive survey of the many methods of Christian apologetics using a unique, whole-person approach. He addresses core apologetics issues facing Christians in the twenty-first century, including the evidence for God's existence, the challenge of evil, the uniqueness of Jesus Christ, world religions, and more. This accessible text, now in paper, will appeal to students and all who wrestle with intellectual obstacles to faith. Each chapter contains an outline, summary, list of basic terms, reflection and discussion questions, and guide to further reading. Chapter overviews and sidebars enhance the text.

1

A Reason for the Hope Within

The Nature of Apologetics

» Outline

---

• The Nature of Christian Apologetics
  • Two Consequences of Faith-based Apologetics
    • The Rejection of Neutrality
    • The Consistency of Faith and Rationality
  • Specific Apologetical Tasks
    • Four Forms of Rational and Critical Thinking about Christianity
    • Four Metaphors for Positive and Negative Apologetics
• The Purpose of Christian Apologetics
  • The Cultivation of Christian Commitment
  • Issues Addressed by Christian Apologists
  • Noncomparative and Comparative Rationality
  • Modest Apologetics versus Ambitious Apologetics
• The Limits of Christian Apologetics
  • The Practical Limits of Christian Apologetics
    • A Heart of Humility
    • An Irenic Approach
  • The Theoretical Limits of Christian Apologetics
    • The Limits of Arguments and Evidences
    • How Apologetical Theory and Practice Work Together

» Summary

---

Christian apologetics is a defense of the reasonableness of believing that the Christian worldview is universally and objectively true. Apologists draw on objective reasons, arguments, and evidences for this purpose. Apologists employ these rational resources both to help faith grow by offering a positive case for Christian claims (watering) and to prevent faith from dying by arguing against objections to Christian claims (weeding). The goal is to try to show that Christianity is at least as reasonable as its most reasonable competitor or, if possible, that it is more reasonable than any worldview with which it competes. But there are both theoretical and practical limits to apologetics. Apologists need to be humble, irenic, and aware that all their arguments are rationally resistible.

» Basic Terms, Concepts, and Names

---

ambitious apologetics

apologetics

apology

circular arguments

comparative rationality

modest apologetics

negative apologetics

noncomparative rationality

polemics

positive apologetics

rational resistibility

worldviews

» Reflection and Discussion

---

» Further Reading

---

Do not fear . . . and do not be intimidated, but in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be ready to make your defense [apologia] to anyone who demands from you a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and reverence.

1 Peter 3:14–15, author’s translation

Nowadays, an apology is an expression of regret for a wrong done. When you apologize to someone for something you did to that person, you are (ideally) not trying to prove something or to defend your actions but instead to admit that you were wrong about something you both can agree you did. In contrast, an apology in ancient Greece (Greek: apologia) was a legal defense against an official charge. If you have taken a philosophy class, you may be familiar with Plato’s Apology, in which he describes Socrates’ defense at his trial in response to the charges brought against him by some of his fellow citizens. In this dialogue, Plato records the arguments Socrates employed for the purpose of convincing the jury not to convict him of these charges. Socrates gives reasons in support of the claim that he is innocent so that his fellow Athenians might see the accusations leveled at him as unreasonable. In ancient Greece, therefore, an apology involved formulating arguments and giving reasons in one’s defense.

In the New Testament, the author of the Epistle of 1 Peter exhorts his persecuted Christian readers to be prepared to provide an apologia for their Christian hope when their opponents challenge them (3:15). In light of the legal context in which this Greek word was typically used, it seems clear that the recipients of this epistle were being urged to defend themselves against criticism by giving reasons for the truth of the beliefs on which their hope was based. When we look at 1 Peter as a whole, it becomes apparent that the aim of this letter was to encourage Christians in Asia Minor to cultivate faith, hope, and love so that they might obtain the salvation of their souls (1:9) and cause nonbelievers to glorify God by their good example (2:12). This is the context in which we must understand the passage quoted above, a passage often cited as a scriptural mandate for Christian apologetics—the defense of the Christian faith. If this mandate applies to Christians today, and I believe it does, then all followers of Jesus are called to be apologists. This passage teaches three things about the nature, purpose, and limits of Christian apologetics.

The Nature of Christian Apologetics

The first thing the 1 Peter passage teaches is that Christian apologetics is a reasoned defense of Christian belief that starts with a foundation of faith in Jesus Christ as Lord (“set apart Christ as Lord”). Christian apologetics is not a neutral study of religion in general or of Christianity in particular (like religious studies or philosophy of religion) but a defense of the truth of Christian convictions from the standpoint of Christian commitment. At least two important consequences follow from this starting point.

First, apologists are not people who suspend all their fundamental beliefs and values in order to investigate how reasonable it is to have them. Such a completely neutral stance is neither possible nor desirable. It is not possible, since we do not have direct voluntary control over our fundamental beliefs and values. We cannot simply decide to get rid of our convictions and ideals at the drop of a hat. Moreover, a change in people’s fundamental beliefs and values always results in the adoption of alternative beliefs and values. Complete neutrality about fundamental beliefs and values just is not possible. Furthermore, a complete suspension of fundamental beliefs and values would not be desirable even if it were possible. For one thing, healthy living requires some basic convictions and commitments. Moreover, even if people have not examined their beliefs and values carefully, it is usually more reasonable for them to continue affirming them than to withhold them. Therefore, a complete suspension of conviction and commitment would be unreasonable. It is often reasonable to maintain the same perspectives and principles even in the face of apparently good arguments against them, because further investigation may well show that these opposing arguments are not so good after all. This sort of thing happens in the sciences frequently when scientists initially encounter evidence that seems to falsify their theories. If these theories have explanatory value and have survived prior tests, it is reasonable to keep them until the evidence against them is overwhelming. If this practice is reasonable for scientists, then it is also rational for Christians and Christian apologists.

Second, Christian faith is consistent with rational and critical thinking about Christian claims. This is further support for the position about the relationship between faith and reason given in the introduction. Both faith and reason are valuable Christian resources. Christians are called to engage in rational and critical thinking about their faith, as long as this thinking is Christian. Christian thinking involves reflecting on life and the world from a Christian perspective—that is, from the standpoint of Christian beliefs of the sort listed in the introduction. There is a sense in which Christian theology is thinking about everything—God, the world, and human life—from the standpoint of the basic Christian convictions that are derivable from the Bible. The end result of such contemplation is not only a Christian theology but also a Christian worldview, a big, unified way of seeing everything from a Christian perspective. There are, of course, non-Christian worldviews as well, and we will look at some of these in chapters 7, 8, 18, and 19. Chapter 24 also considers the postmodern idea that the idea of a worldview as traditionally conceived is wrongheaded. But for now we will concentrate primarily on the rational and critical evaluation of the Christian worldview.

To say that Christian apologetics involves rational and critical thinking about the Christian worldview from the standpoint of Christian commitment is not to say that the arguments and evidences employed by a Christian apologist will presuppose the truth of Christian claims. If they did, they would be circular arguments, and circular arguments cannot provide rational support for their conclusions. Instead, a Christian apologist is a committed Christian who is motivated by this commitment to engage in rational and critical thinking about the Christian worldview in order to show that it is reasonable to adopt it. On the other hand, once an argument has been offered for a claim, it is legitimate to use this claim as a premise in an argument for another conclusion. For instance, once an apologist has given adequate reasons for believing that God exists, it is appropriate to assume God’s existence in an argument for the possibility of miracles. If it were not for this possibility of employing the conclusions of some arguments as premises in other arguments, it would not be possible to construct the kind of cumulative case for the Christian worldview illustrated in this book.[1] Such a cumulative case for Christianity is based on the accumulation of a range of philosophical arguments, historical evidences, scientific observations, and personal experiences.

This kind of defense employs the following four forms of rational and critical thinking about the Christian worldview:

1. giving reasons for thinking that the core claims of the Christian worldview are true
2. arguing that objections against the Christian worldview do not succeed in showing that it is unreasonable or false
3. giving reasons for thinking that the claims of worldviews that are logically inconsistent with the Christian worldview (such as naturalism and many but not all the claims of Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism) are unreasonable or false
4. arguing that the arguments given for the claims of alternative worldviews that are inconsistent with Christianity do not succeed in showing that those alternative worldviews are true

Historically, the word apologetics has often applied narrowly only to tasks 1 and 2. Tasks 3 and 4 have traditionally been labeled “polemics,” since they not only have to do with defending the rationality of the Christian worldview but also involve arguing against other worldviews. This book uses the word apologetics broadly to include tasks 1 through 4 (both apologetics and polemics in the narrow sense of these terms).

Apologetic tasks 1 through 4 can be classified in terms of the two apologetic strategies mentioned at the end of the introduction: watering and weeding. Task 1 is a watering task, and tasks 2 through 4 are weeding tasks. Recall that apologetic watering involves preparing for the cultivation of Christian commitment by giving reasons that contribute to the case for the rationality of belief in the Christian worldview. Other metaphors may be helpful in expressing the main idea here. With a theater metaphor, we could talk about setting the stage. A play cannot occur until the appropriate scenery and props are provided. A metaphor from competitive sports would characterize this apologetic task in terms of a positive, offensive strategy that would make it more likely that your team would score a goal. In regard to construction, we could think in terms of laying the groundwork for a building. What all these metaphors are intended to convey is the idea of giving reasons for thinking that Christianity is true. Apologetic weeding involves removing reasons for thinking that Christianity is false. We can express the same idea by talking about clearing the stage or removing obstacles (theater), a defensive strategy aimed at preventing the other team from scoring points (sports), and retrofitting a building to protect it from earthquakes (construction).

I have chosen the gardening metaphor because, as explained above, it reminds us that there is a role for both humans and God in the cultivation of Christian commitment. All these metaphors can be misleading, because they may seem to imply that apologetic arguments and evidences are always necessary for reasonable faith, a view I rejected above and will argue against in the next chapter. To avoid misunderstanding along these lines, we should remember that, though watering is always required for a garden to grow, this water can be and often is supplied by rain, something over which humans have no control. It is only in special conditions—drought, for instance—that humans need to intervene with additional water.

The Purpose of Christian Apologetics

The second lesson we can learn from 1 Peter 3:14–15 is that the aim of Christian apologetics is to cultivate Christian commitment among both believers and unbelievers by means of a relevant reservoir of reasons (“always be ready to make your defense to anyone who demands from you a reason for the hope that is in you”). These are reasons in support of Christian faith that can be given at different times (“always”) and to different people (“to anyone”). The history of Christian apologetics is a history of defenses of the eternal gospel of Jesus Christ that address the concerns of the apologists’ times in the language of those times.[2]

Some of the concerns addressed by Christian apologists are perennial—they are the same from one generation to the next. The questions raised in the introduction about Jesus’ divinity and resurrection from the dead are among these (see chaps. 13–16). Another is the problem of evil, the problem of trying to understand why God allows the kinds and quantities of sin, pain, and suffering that exist in the world (see chaps. 11–12). However, there are other issues that are not on the apologist’s front burner as they used to be. An example is polytheism, the belief in and worship of many gods. Though this was a topic of Paul’s address to the Athenians at the Areopagus (see Acts 17:16–34), it is no longer a major competitor with the Christian faith, at least in our society and culture.[3] Idolatry, however, is a concern closely related to polytheism that survives in altered form to this day. Though we are not tempted in our culture to bow down physically to idols like statuettes, the attitudes and behaviors we manifest toward rock musicians, movie stars, and famous athletes are similar to the thoughts and actions of worshipers. We also tend to treat money as an idol. Jesus’ warning that it is not possible to serve both God and money (Matt. 6:24) is just one of many New Testament admonitions against this form of idolatry. Our culture’s materialism and consumerism are signs that the almighty dollar has not stopped competing with God.

The focus of this book, however, is on more intellectual threats to the Christian worldview, theoretical alternatives that vie for belief rather than practical alternatives that compete for behavior. Among the more intellectual challenges to contemporary Christian belief (that have not always faced Christians so urgently as they do today) are skepticism about the existence of God (chaps. 11–12), the problem of religious pluralism (chaps. 18–19), the higher critical approach to the Bible (chaps. 13–15, 21), various scientific challenges (such as Darwinian evolutionary theory; chaps. 10, 22), and postmodern relativism and nihilism (chaps. 24–25).

The purpose of apologetic...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction: I Believe, but Help My Unbelief!
• Part 1: Apologetics and Commitment
• Part 2: Commitment to God
• Part 3: Commitment to God in Christ
• Part 4: Contemporary Challenges to Christian Commitment
• Conclusion: Cultivating Christian Commitment
• Other Books on Christian Apologetics
• Index
• Notes