What apologetics is for: defense, clarification and invitation

Program / Course 13: Foundations of Apologetics / Lesson 1.3

What you will learn

• Name three main purposes of apologetics: defense, clarification and invitation.
• Distinguish apologetics from evangelism, theology and polemics.
• Explain how apologetics can serve believers as well as outsiders.
• Recognize when a use of argument has drifted away from its purposes.

The big idea

Apologetics has been used for many things, and not all of them are good. Rightly practiced, it has three aims. It defends the faith against charges that it is false, foolish or harmful. It clarifies what Christians actually believe, which is often misunderstood. And it invites the listener to look again with an open mind. Each aim serves a person, not a score. When apologetics becomes a contest to humiliate an opponent, it has lost its purpose, whatever the quality of its arguments.

Key terms

Defense

Answering a charge or objection, either by showing that it is mistaken or by showing that it does not defeat the belief it targets.

Clarification

Explaining what a belief really says and does not say, so that it can be judged fairly.

Invitation

Opening a path by which a person can examine the faith further, without forcing a decision.

Evangelism

Sharing the good news of Jesus Christ with others in hope that they will respond in faith.

Polemics

Writing or speech aimed at attacking an opposing view. The word comes from a Greek word for war.

Objection

A reason offered against a belief. It may be a challenge to a fact, an argument or a moral claim.

Pre-evangelism

A term used by some writers for the work of clearing away obstacles to belief before the gospel is preached directly.

Background

Christians have defended their faith since the earliest centuries. In the second century, writers such as Justin Martyr composed formal defenses addressed to emperors, arguing that Christians were not criminals and that their teaching deserved a hearing. Later writers answered philosophers, heretics and rival religions. In every age the questions changed, but the work of explaining the faith to people who doubted it continued.

Because the work has such a long and varied history, it has been used for different ends. Some writers seem to aim at convincing outsiders. Others write to reassure believers who are troubled by doubts. Others write to warn against error inside the church. A student should ask of any piece of apologetics: who is it for, what does it hope to do, and does it do that honestly?

Step-by-step explanation

Step 1: Defense

The first and oldest purpose is defense. A critic says that Christianity is irrational, harmful or based on a fraud. The apologist answers. Sometimes the answer shows that a charge is mistaken in fact, for example when a critic repeats a false claim about what Christians believe or did. Sometimes the answer shows that the charge is weaker than it sounds, or that the belief can stand even if part of the charge is true.

Defense is not the same as proving the whole faith. A person may show that one objection fails without showing that the faith is true. This is a modest goal, but an important one. It clears away reasons that may keep a person from looking further.

Step 2: Clarification

Many arguments against Christianity are aimed at a belief that Christians do not hold. A critic may think the Trinity means three gods, or that grace means that behavior does not matter. In such cases the most useful thing an apologist can do is to explain the actual teaching. This is not an evasion. A claim cannot be judged until it is understood.

Clarification also guards against a different danger: the temptation to present a simpler or more attractive version of the faith than the church actually teaches. Honest apologetics describes the faith as it is, including the parts that are hard to believe or hard to live.

Step 3: Invitation

The third purpose is to invite. Apologetics seldom ends a conversation. At its best, it leaves a door open: here is a reason to read the Gospel of Mark, to attend a service, to ask a question of someone who prays. Some writers describe this as pre-evangelism, preparing the ground. Others dislike the term because they think the gospel itself is the best argument. Either way, invitation respects the listener’s freedom.

An invitation is not a trap. It does not hide its aim, and it does not pretend that the listener has no right to say no. It also does not demand an immediate decision. The conversation may take years.

Step 4: Serving believers

Apologetics is often pictured as speech aimed at outsiders, but it also serves Christians. A believer who meets a strong objection in a class, at work or online may begin to doubt. Careful answers can steady a person who wants to remain faithful and also wants to think honestly. Many people in the history of the church, such as Augustine, wrote partly to help believers who faced questions from within as well as from outside.

This service has a limit. Reassurance that ignores real difficulties does not help. A good apologist admits when a question is hard, when the answer is disputed among Christians, and when the evidence leaves room for more than one conclusion.

Step 5: Telling apologetics from its neighbors

Apologetics overlaps with other work but is not identical to it. Evangelism announces the good news and calls for faith. Theology explains what the faith teaches and how its parts fit together. Polemics attacks a view, often within the church, and has a long and sometimes harsh history. Apologetics sits between these. It uses reasons, as theology does, and it speaks to people outside the circle of belief, as evangelism does. But its focus is the answering of questions and objections.

These distinctions help in practice. If a person asks a sincere question, an answer in the style of polemics will probably fail. If a person already believes and wants to grow, a long apologetic argument may be beside the point.

1. Which of the three purposes, defense, clarification or invitation, comes most naturally to you, and which comes least?
2. Can you think of a common objection that is really aimed at a belief Christians do not hold?
3. What is the difference between showing that an objection fails and showing that the faith is true?
4. How does invitation differ from pressure?
5. How might apologetics help a believer who is struggling with doubts?
6. When does a defense of the faith turn into an attack on a person?

Examples

Different perspectives

Early Church apologists

Writers such as Justin Martyr composed defenses addressed to outsiders, aiming to correct false charges against Christians and to explain Christian worship and ethics. They also invited readers to examine Christian teaching for themselves.

Roman Catholic

Catholic teaching places apologetics within the Church’s mission to give reasons for the faith, and treats the use of reason in service of faith as a duty. Reasons prepare the way and do not replace the gift of faith itself.

Evangelical Protestant

Many evangelical writers see apologetics as the removal of intellectual barriers to faith and a support for evangelism. Some also stress its value for strengthening believers. Several warn that argument must never replace prayer or the preaching of Christ.

Eastern Orthodox

Orthodox writers more often stress worship and the life of holiness as the church’s chief witness. Reasons are valued, but they are placed second to the experience of the liturgy and the example of the saints.

Secular and skeptical critics

Some critics hold that apologetics is rationalization after the fact, an effort to defend a conclusion already reached. A fair apologist should take the charge seriously and ask whether each argument would be accepted if it were used for a view the apologist rejects.

Why it matters

A person who does not know what apologetics is for will tend to use it badly. Using it as a weapon will push people away. Using it only to calm one’s own fears will avoid real questions. Using it as a substitute for a Christian life will make it hollow. Knowing the three purposes provides a way to check any conversation or piece of writing: is this defending something true, explaining something real, and inviting someone freely?

Common misunderstandings

Knowledge check

Think it through

1. Think of a time when someone explained your own view so badly that you could not recognize it. What did you want them to understand?
2. Do you find it easier to defend, to clarify or to invite? What does that say about your habits?
3. What would change in your conversations if the goal was to be understood first and to win second?
4. Which kinds of questions are best answered by an argument, and which by a life or a community?

Independent assignment

Three answers to one objection

In your own notebook, write 400 to 600 words. Choose an objection to Christianity that you have heard or can imagine. Write three short responses: one that defends, one that clarifies and one that invites. Then write a paragraph on which response seems most fitting for a person who is merely curious, and why. Keep this for yourself.

Further study

• Justin Martyr, The First Apology Read the opening sections to see how an early apologist defends and clarifies at the same time.
• C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity Read the preface and Book 1 to see an effort to explain and invite in plain language.
• Augustine of Hippo, Confessions A work that serves both inquirers and believers, written as prayer.
• 1 Peter 3:15 Reread the verse and ask which of the three purposes it names.
• Jude 1:3 A call to contend for the faith. Read it with attention to tone and to the verses around it.