I’m sure
many of you have learned the hard way—as I did—that possessing apologetic
knowledge and the ability to answer the tough questions are not enough. It’s equally important that we be able to
apply this knowledge effectively; that is, be able to engage unbelievers in a
way that they will listen, understand, and consider.
In this and
the following five blogs, I’ll lay out the "dos" and
"don'ts" of good apologetics.
On the "do" side are the principles of sound apologetics
tactics. On the "don't" side are the pitfalls of poor
apologetics--things to avoid. All together they provide the ground rules of
effective apologetic evangelism.
I call these
principles the “Ten Commandments of Apologetics,” and they were originally
published (in fuller detail) in my book, Engaging
the Closed Minded; Presenting Your Faith to the Confirmed Unbeliever
(Kregel Publications, 1999).
1. Gospel
first, apologetics second: Whenever possible try to start a witnessing
encounter with the Gospel—which is what unbelievers must ultimately hear in
order to be saved. It is wrong to assume that every unbeliever harbors
intellectual objections to Christianity. Hence, not every witnessing situation
requires an apologetic defense (or offense). If the unbeliever responds to the
Gospel, forget apologetics and continue to share the “good news” of Jesus Christ.
Confirm the Gospel by sharing your personal testimony, demonstrating the
life-transforming power of the Holy Spirit in your own life.
Often, however,
you may have to earn the opportunity to share the Gospel. In many encounters
with unbelievers, you’ll find yourself responding to challenges or answering
questions concerning issues far removed from the Gospel, and the plan of
salvation will have to come later. In such cases, apologetics becomes
pre-evangelism—a tool to pave the way for a Gospel presentation. But remember
that the goal of all apologetics is to lead an unbeliever to Jesus Christ.
2. Stay
with the essentials: Most
non-Christians know little about the Bible or what Christians believe, and what
they think they know is often in error. When sharing the Gospel, avoid
theological subjects that will be confusing to unbelievers, such as eschatology
or predestination. Likewise, avoid in-house debatable issues, such as speaking
in tongues or method of baptism. Similarly (if you can), don’t get hung up on controversial
issues, such as the age of the earth. We
should never muddy the waters of good evangelism with topics Christian may
rightfully disagree on. Of course if the unbeliever raises an issue that he or
she is genuinely concerned about, we need to respond appropriately. The apostle
Paul gives a good summary of the essentials in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4. In a word,
the essentials always revolve around the person and work of Jesus Christ.
3.
Remember your goal: The goal of
apologetics is to identify and remove obstacles that prevent a person from
seriously considering Christianity as a world and life view—and Jesus Christ as
personal Savior. The impulse for many new students of apologetics is to rush
out and confront everyone you know and challenge their misbeliefs (especially
family members or friends who may have tripped you in the past). But keep in
mind that apologetics is not an excuse to argue, and we should never force
apologetics on someone or create illegitimate reasons to use it. Often a
person’s “obstacle” is not intellectual at all. It may have been a bad
experience in church or with a hypocritical Christian. It may be an emotional
struggle or the loss of a loved one, resulting in anger at God. Whatever the
issue is, we respond accordingly. Often Christian love and understanding is all
that is needed.(c)
I hope these
first three “commandments” are helpful. Next week we’ll look at several more.
Dan Story
Thank you for all you have done to help us who struggle with evangelism and specifically apologetics. However the way I see it is all evangelism is apologetics but not all apologetics is evangelism. There are just different approaches to the defense. I know some don't hold this same view and perhaps I am wrong. Again thanks as you have helped me how to see these different approaches and respond to them.
ReplyDelete