Program / Course 24: Apologetic Practicum / Lesson 6.1
What you will learn
- Recognize theological jargon and replace it with plain words without changing the meaning.
- Explain a doctrine in three lengths: one sentence, one paragraph and a short talk.
- Use examples and comparisons carefully, knowing where each one fails.
- Test your explanation on a reader and revise it.
The big idea
This lesson belongs to an optional subunit. Nothing in it requires you to speak or write in public, and every exercise can be done privately in your notebook. The skill taught here is useful in any setting: explaining a Christian doctrine to someone who has never studied it, in plain words and without distortion. The challenge is to be simple without being wrong. Analogies help but every analogy fails somewhere, and a good explainer says where. Plain speech is a form of respect for the listener.
Key terms
- Jargon
- Specialized words used within a group that outsiders do not understand.
- Doctrine
- A teaching of a church or tradition about what is to be believed.
- Analogy
- A comparison between something unfamiliar and something familiar, used to explain.
- Modalism
- The early teaching that Father, Son and Spirit are one God appearing in three successive forms, not three persons. The church rejected it.
- Audience analysis
- Considering who will hear or read your explanation, what they know and what they care about.
- Plain language
- Clear, direct words and short sentences that an ordinary reader can follow.
- Technical term
- A specialized word that is needed for accuracy, which should be explained the first time it is used.
Background
Optional note: this subunit on public faith and social media apologetics is entirely optional. A student may skip it, study it and do all exercises privately, or choose to share something publicly elsewhere. The program does not require, collect or review any public participation, and a student who stays private is not behind.
Christian teaching has always needed translation. Paul tells the Corinthians that if a speaker utters words not easily understood, no one will know what is said (1 Corinthians 14:9). The New Testament was written in common Greek, not literary Greek. Jerome translated the Bible into Latin for ordinary people, and the Reformers insisted on worship and Scripture in the language of the people. At the same time, some Christian traditions treasure liturgical languages and technical vocabulary, because exact words protect against error. The two concerns, clarity and exactness, must be balanced.
Analogies used for the Trinity illustrate the risk. Comparing the Trinity to water that is ice, liquid and steam suggests that one thing takes three forms in turn, a position called modalism, which the early church rejected. Comparing it to an egg with shell, white and yolk suggests three parts, which the church also rejected. Many teachers say it is better to use no illustration than a misleading one, or to use one and clearly say where it fails.
Step-by-step explanation
Step 1: Know your audience
Ask who will read or hear this. A teenager who has never been to church, a friend raised in another tradition, a skeptical neighbor and a lifelong believer need different things. Decide what they already know and what they are likely to find strange or offensive.
Write one sentence describing the audience before you write anything else. If you cannot picture a reader, the explanation will drift.
Step 2: Find the jargon
List every term in your draft that a newcomer might not know: justification, atonement, incarnation, grace, sanctification, sacrament, eschatology. For each, decide whether it can be replaced with plain words or whether it must stay and be defined. Words like incarnation may be needed because they name what the church says, but a short definition on first use helps: ‘incarnation, the belief that God the Son became a human being.’
Be careful that a plain substitute is accurate. ‘Salvation’ as ‘getting into heaven’ is a common simplification, but Christian traditions describe salvation as more: forgiveness, healing, new life, union with God. State it in a way your own tradition would accept.
Step 3: Write three lengths
Write the doctrine in one sentence (a definition), in a paragraph (with a reason or Scripture) and in a two-minute talk (with an example and a note about where traditions differ). Example for the Incarnation: ‘Christians believe that God the Son became a real human being in Jesus of Nazareth, fully God and fully man (see John 1:14).’
The one-sentence version is a test. If you cannot write it plainly, you may not yet understand the doctrine.
Step 4: Use analogies with care
Choose a comparison, state what it shows and say where it fails. For the Trinity: ‘Some compare it to a family of three persons, but that suggests three separate beings, and Christians hold that there is one God.’ Honesty about the limits of an analogy is more convincing than a neat picture.
Stories and concrete examples often explain better than abstractions. Jesus taught with parables. But each parable has a point, and the teacher should state it.
Step 5: Mark where traditions differ
Many doctrines are held in common, and some are not. If you explain the Eucharist, atonement or baptism, note that Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant Christians hold different views and state yours as yours. Do not present one tradition’s teaching as simply ‘what Christians believe’ when it is not.
A phrase such as ‘Catholics teach, Orthodox teach and many Protestants teach’ costs few words and prevents a large misunderstanding.
Step 6: Test and revise
Ask a reader unfamiliar with theology to read your explanation and say it back to you. Where they stumble, revise. If no reader is available, put the text away for a day and reread it as a stranger. Cut sentences that a stranger would skip.
Revision is not dilution. A shorter, clearer version often shows what the doctrine really claims.
- Who is my reader, and what do they already know?
- Which words in my draft would a newcomer not know?
- Does my plain version say the same thing as the technical one?
- Where does my analogy fail, and have I said so?
- Have I marked where Christian traditions differ?
- Could a stranger repeat my explanation back to me?
Examples
Jargon and its plain version
Jargon: ‘Christ’s work effected the believer’s justification through a vicarious atonement.’ Plain version: ‘Christians believe that through Jesus’ death on the cross, God forgives sin and makes people right with him. Traditions explain how this works in different ways.’ The plain version is shorter and keeps the point. (Constructed example.)
A faulty analogy corrected
‘The Trinity is like water: ice, liquid and steam.’ A better statement: ‘Some people use water as an illustration, but it suggests one thing taking turns being three forms. Christians hold that Father, Son and Spirit are distinct persons who are all God at the same time. Every illustration falls short.’ (Constructed example.)
A short talk outline
Doctrine: grace. One sentence: ‘Grace is God’s undeserved gift of forgiveness and help.’ Paragraph: add Ephesians 2:8 and a plain example of an unearned gift. Talk: add a story, note that Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant traditions describe how grace works differently, and end with an invitation to learn more. (Constructed outline.)
Different perspectives
Catholic thought
The Catholic Church has long produced catechisms for ordinary believers, such as the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which states doctrine in question-and-answer or plain exposition. Catholic teaching also values technical precision, as in conciliar definitions, and asks that popular teaching stay faithful to them.
Orthodox thought
Orthodox writers often warn against reducing the faith to concepts and stress that doctrine is expressed in worship, hymns and icons as well as in definitions. Orthodox catechesis often proceeds through the liturgical year.
Protestant thought
Protestants have produced many catechisms, such as Luther’s Small Catechism, designed for heads of households to teach simply. They also emphasize the clarity of Scripture on essential matters and the use of the vernacular.
Communication scholars
Research on plain language suggests that shorter sentences, active verbs and concrete examples improve understanding. Some researchers warn that oversimplification can mislead, and recommend testing explanations with real readers.
Why it matters
Many people outside the church, and some inside it, do not understand the words Christians use. If you cannot explain a doctrine plainly, you may not be able to tell whether you understand it. Clear speech serves the listener and tests the speaker. It is equally useful in teaching a child, in a talk with a friend or in a private notebook, so the skill has value whether or not you ever speak publicly.
Common misunderstandings
Misunderstanding: Plain language means dumbing down the faith.
Correction: Plain language aims at accuracy that an ordinary listener can follow. Simplicity that distorts is a failure, but clarity that preserves meaning is a skill.
Misunderstanding: A good analogy explains a doctrine fully.
Correction: No analogy does. The better practice is to say what an analogy shows and where it fails.
Misunderstanding: I must go public to use this skill.
Correction: It is useful in family, friendships, teaching and private writing. The subunit is optional, and public speech is a separate choice.
Misunderstanding: Technical terms should be avoided at all costs.
Correction: Some terms are needed for precision, such as Trinity or incarnation. The practice is to define them on first use.
Knowledge check
Why can an analogy for the Trinity mislead?
Popular comparisons, such as water in three forms or an egg in three parts, imply that God takes turns being three forms or is divided into parts. The church rejected both ideas. A teacher should say that all analogies fall short and name how each does.
What is the value of writing a doctrine in one sentence?
It tests understanding. If you cannot state the core claim plainly, you may not grasp it. A one-sentence version is also a base for longer explanations and for conversation where time is short. It should preserve the meaning and avoid unexplained technical terms.
When should a technical term be kept?
When it names something that plain words cannot capture without distortion, such as incarnation or Trinity. Keep it, define it the first time and use it consistently. Avoid technical terms that add nothing, and avoid plain substitutes that change the meaning.
Why mark where Christian traditions differ?
Because many doctrines are explained differently by Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants, and presenting one version as universal is inaccurate. A short note such as ‘Catholics teach, Orthodox teach, many Protestants teach’ keeps the explanation honest and respects the listener.
How can you test whether an explanation is clear?
Ask a reader unfamiliar with theology to read it and say it back in their own words, then revise where they stumble. If no reader is available, set the text aside for a day and reread it as a stranger would. Clarity is judged by the reader, not the writer.
Think it through
- Which Christian word do you use most that a newcomer would not understand?
- Can you explain the Incarnation to a ten-year-old without error?
- Which popular illustration of a doctrine have you heard that now seems misleading?
- How would you feel about a choice not to take part in any public sharing of your faith?
Independent assignment
Three lengths of one doctrine
In your own notebook, write 400 to 600 words. Choose one doctrine (for example the Incarnation, grace, the resurrection or the Trinity). Write it in one sentence, then in one paragraph, then as a talk of about 300 words, with one example, one analogy (stating where it fails) and a note on where traditions differ. List the jargon you removed or defined. If you wish, test it on a trusted reader. This is a private exercise, and nothing needs to be shared.
Further study
- C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity A model of plain explanation of doctrine for a general audience.
- Martin Luther, The Small Catechism A model of brief, simple statements of doctrine for ordinary people.
- Catholic Church, Catechism of the Catholic Church A model of plain exposition of a whole faith, with sources.
- Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction A reference for checking that a plain statement is accurate across traditions.
- 1 Corinthians 14:9 Utter words easy to be understood.
- John 1:14 The Word was made flesh.
- Ephesians 2:8 By grace are ye saved through faith.