Apologetics, or the art of defending the faith, has enjoyed a resurgence in popularity in recent years. Those who are familiar with the topic are probably also familiar with the debate over apologetic technique. Should we follow Cornelius Van Til, Greg Bahnsen and others by simply challenging the presuppositions from which the non-Christian looks at the world? Perhaps we should just focus on presenting evidences in favor of God generally or Christianity specifically, as William Lane Craig would? Or does the classical apologetic of R.C. Sproul and John Gerstner capture the true essence of defending the faith? Then there’s a fourth option: should we try to somehow blend all of the techniques into one? There are books that deal with the issue of technique in detail, but very often these volumes miss something vital. This “vital something” makes the difference between being a mere dispenser of arguments and a presenter of what I call “the complete apologetic.”
The Complete Apologist
To answer the question “what is the complete apologetic?” I must first describe what “the complete apologist” looks like. It is often thought that apologetics is a purely intellectual enterprise. Many Christians see it as the province of the most educated and intellectually sophisticated in the church. Others may see it as frivolous speculation which will have little impact on every day life, and sometimes this is the case. It is quite easy to get lost in the ivory tower if that is your proclivity. On the other hand, the Christian who has no contact with the ivory tower whatsoever, in the sense of understanding what ideas shape our culture today and what will shape it tomorrow, is also making a mistake. Neither can truly say they have fulfilled the complete apologetic task.
There are actually three aspects to the complete apologist, two of which are closely related. First, the complete apologist must have a tender heart. The calluses that so easily form around our hearts must be peeled away, allowing us to love as Christ loved. We must run the risk of having our hearts broken. Second, we must have a helpful hand. It is easy to see how these two go together. A helpful hand is a natural extension of a tender heart. These two go together to balance the third aspect of the complete apologist, the agile mind. It is this aspect that comes to mind when most people think about apologetics, but it is not the only aspect.
The Tender Heart
1 Peter 3:15 is often taken as a theme verse by apologetics ministries, and with good reason. The Greek word apologia, from which the term “apologetics” derives its name, appears in that verse. What is sometimes glossed over is the clause at the end of the verse: “…yet with gentleness and reverence” (NASB). I have encountered many apologists and apologetics ministries that ignore this clause and allow their human desire to win arguments at all costs take over.
What does this biting tone communicate to the non-Christian? People are now hypersensitive to religious zealots “telling them what to believe.” When we berate and belittle those with whom we disagree we add fuel to that fire. Ours is not to excoriate our opponents. In fact, calling someone an “opponent” is probably wrong-headed as well. Satan is our adversary, but those whom he uses are his hapless puppets. They are puppets with souls, and God desires to see them come into His kingdom. We must never forget this fact. Talking at, as opposed to talking to, someone is generally counterproductive.
Christ approached people with a gentle demeanor (except for in special circumstances). In a day of bitterness and division, if we come gently speaking the truth we will gain an audience. The truth must not be sacrificed for gentleness, but neither should gentleness be sacrificed in our communication of the truth. And when someone comes to see that what we say is true, we must be ready to weep with them as they are confronted with their own worldview and its meaninglessness. Then, as tender hearted apologists, we show them the beauty and meaning that a life in Christ can be.
The Helpful Hand
The early Church was known for the love that flowed from brother to brother and then out into the world. Pagan opponents of Christianity sometimes noted how the Christians took care of not only other Christians, but of pagans as well. Christians would have no part, for instance, of the pagan practice of exposing unwanted infants to die in the wilderness.
When a group of people are so willing to give of themselves they rise above petty criticisms that can be raised against their belief. This is largely missing in the American church today. We have absorbed the individualism and materialism (in both senses of the term) of the culture that surrounds us. We are unwilling to stretch out our hand to help or to give sacrificially. Many American Christians are only vaguely humanitarian. We send a few cents to World Vision or Samaritan’s Purse, but nothing beyond that. We’re too busy and our resources are already committed.
The complete apologist will take the necessary steps to “de-commit” his resources. We need to be free to give sacrificially not just to God directly, but to help those in our world who are hurting. We were far too eager to allow the government to take over the task of charity from us.
How does this affect apologetics? The helpful hand opens ears. Is your neighbor shoveling snow? Go out and help him. Does your neighbor need help paying bills? Forgo a little luxury and assist her. When you do you will find that those with whom you labor will respect and listen to what you have to say. This leads nicely into the final mark of the complete apologist.
The Agile Mind
There are two subcategories that characterize the apologist with the agile mind. The first is knowledge. For a Christian to have an agile mind he or she must seek knowledge and come to understand that knowledge. Learn what Mormons truly believe and confront them with that instead of the caricatures that have been circulated amongst orthodox Christians. They will be surprised. Stun your friends by pointing out that the universe could not have eternally existed. If you want to know about any topic and how to build a case for or against it you must gain knowledge. There is no benefit in running off half-cocked and embarrassing yourself and others. Don’t go into an apologetic situation unarmed.
The second aspect of the agile mind is the skilled use of tactics. In some circles “tactics” have a negative connotation because they are associated with subterfuge and dishonesty. Some tactics are dishonest, but no one with a tender heart and helpful hand would ever use them. Rather, the complete apologist should know ways to take apart arguments in skilled and useful ways. By “skill” I mean that the apologist should have already learned how to think logically and to analyze arguments, and by “usefulness” I mean the apologist should know the appropriate approach to take in refuting an argument against the faith.
Conclusion
The complete apologist is the truly Biblical apologist. Only if we imitate Christ in our demeanor will our answers to skeptical arguments have their full effect. We must not let our zeal for defending Christ lead us to unduly offend others in His name.
