Apprehension with Entering Apologetics

[Youssarian]

I really enjoy apologetics. It's shown me that there's good reason to believe in God and has helped rebuild my faith. I never knew it existed until late last year and I'm very happy I did discover it. I don't want to say it's my calling, but it's something I wouldn't mind pursuing in my ministry.

There are however, two main obstacles stopping me from fully engaging in it. First of all apologetics often deals with non-Christians in science and philosophy. And these people can come up with really good scientific and philosophical arguments that could cast doubt on one or more of the lines of reasoning that I've learned of so far. I suppose my biggest fear when venturing to websites and articles that aren't written by Christians is that they're going to have something that straight up disproves the possibility of God - or at least, casts considerable doubt. Most of my learning about apologetics and science have been from sites built explicitly for Christians.

Most science does tend to be neutral concerning God. It's not really a threat to my faith. I think it's when they start talking about things like the origin of the universe that the danger appears.

I think part of this problem involves when people I'm talking to say stuff that I haven't heard of before. They say something so complex that it blows me out of the water, and it seems they have disproved my line of reasoning for God. And of course, I'm afraid to venture on Google and look it up, lest I find even more that agrees with them.

Second, I don't handle antagonism very well. I guess it upsets me or something. When someone writes or talks to me in an obviously sarcastic or rude way, I guess it gets to me. I take the hatred more personally than I should. It would be wise for me to remember, their hatred is not toward me but toward Christ.

Any advise would be appreciated.

[Diggindeeper]

I think part of this problem involves when people I'm talking to say stuff that I haven't heard of before. They say something so complex that it blows me out of the water, and it seems they have disproved my line of reasoning for God. And of course, I'm afraid to venture on Google and look it up, lest I find even more that agrees with them.

Second, I don't handle antagonism very well. I guess it upsets me or something. When someone writes or talks to me in an obviously sarcastic or rude way, I guess it gets to me. I take the hatred more personally than I should. It would be wise for me to remember, their hatred is not toward me but toward Christ.

Any advise would be appreciated.

First, I suggest you make your calling and election sure. Know what you believe. Then, stand for your beliefs, no matter what others may throw your way.

Second, understand that it is certain ... there will ALWAYS be those who try to pull you away from what you believe. They will always be there to try and block your teaching! They did that when Nehemiah was trying to build his wall.

And third, you said their hatred is not towards you, but towards Christ. When actually, their hatred is toward YOUR BELIEFS as much as toward Christ. You know, I see apologics as the sorting through all the mess and all the claims, to get to the TRUTH. In this particular forum here, notice we have combined APOLOGETICS and EVANGELISM. They really do go hand in hand. Digging and standing for the truth goes hand in hand in showing others the way...God's way!

So I say you are headed in the right direction, friend. You seem to have a yearning for finding TRUTH, and for SORTING it all out, in order to convince others of the truth and the right way. Keep up your studies and your research and may God lead you to truth, no matter what the foes come up with.

[BrckBrln]

First of all apologetics often deals with non-Christians in science and philosophy. And these people can come up with really good scientific and philosophical arguments that could cast doubt on one or more of the lines of reasoning that I've learned of so far. I suppose my biggest fear when venturing to websites and articles that aren't written by Christians is that they're going to have something that straight up disproves the possibility of God - or at least, casts considerable doubt. Most of my learning about apologetics and science have been from sites built explicitly for Christians.

Most science does tend to be neutral concerning God. It's not really a threat to my faith. I think it's when they start talking about things like the origin of the universe that the danger appears.

I think part of this problem involves when people I'm talking to say stuff that I haven't heard of before. They say something so complex that it blows me out of the water, and it seems they have disproved my line of reasoning for God. And of course, I'm afraid to venture on Google and look it up, lest I find even more that agrees with them.

My advice is to get more proficient in these areas. Don't shy away from them. If you run into an argument that you don't know how to answer you can either do your own research or let the people here have a shot at it. The biggest thing is to be patient, don't make rash judgements. Know that there are answers to every argument out there.

Second, I don't handle antagonism very well. I guess it upsets me or something. When someone writes or talks to me in an obviously sarcastic or rude way, I guess it gets to me. I take the hatred more personally than I should. It would be wise for me to remember, their hatred is not toward me but toward Christ.

You just have to learn to be patient and not get too upset. This will come in time.

[Athanasius]

I really enjoy apologetics. It's shown me that there's good reason to believe in God and has helped rebuild my faith. I never knew it existed until late last year and I'm very happy I did discover it. I don't want to say it's my calling, but it's something I wouldn't mind pursuing in my ministry.

There are however, two main obstacles stopping me from fully engaging in it. First of all apologetics often deals with non-Christians in science and philosophy. And these people can come up with really good scientific and philosophical arguments that could cast doubt on one or more of the lines of reasoning that I've learned of so far. I suppose my biggest fear when venturing to websites and articles that aren't written by Christians is that they're going to have something that straight up disproves the possibility of God - or at least, casts considerable doubt. Most of my learning about apologetics and science have been from sites built explicitly for Christians.

Most science does tend to be neutral concerning God. It's not really a threat to my faith. I think it's when they start talking about things like the origin of the universe that the danger appears.

I think part of this problem involves when people I'm talking to say stuff that I haven't heard of before. They say something so complex that it blows me out of the water, and it seems they have disproved my line of reasoning for God. And of course, I'm afraid to venture on Google and look it up, lest I find even more that agrees with them.

If you want to be involved with apologetics, you can't be afraid of the arguments. I'd take BrckBrln's advice and study and learn more. It will come with time. And not knowing an answer isn't a problem, how else do you think you'll learn? Just don't be afraid to say, 'let me get back to you'.

Second, I don't handle antagonism very well. I guess it upsets me or something. When someone writes or talks to me in an obviously sarcastic or rude way, I guess it gets to me. I take the hatred more personally than I should. It would be wise for me to remember, their hatred is not toward me but toward Christ.

Any advise would be appreciated.

Thick skin soft heart, as they say (better than soft skin and tough heart). If someone is getting antagonistic then you may want to re-consider why they are engaging with you, and that perhaps it may be better to reconvene or stop altogether with that particular person for a time. Internet apologetics, by the way, isn't necessarily the best thing to get involved in.

[the rookie]

I really enjoy apologetics.

First of all apologetics often deals with non-Christians in science and philosophy.

My guess is that the areas you enjoy are areas others enjoy as well - or would enjoy, if someone enjoyable engaged them

In other words, there are certain areas of apologetics that move your heart and bring you joy. Someone with a moved heart who loves what they do is a rare and helpful commodity. Secondly, there's value in teaching and training other believers in apologetics as well. Put the two together, and you have an expression of apologetics that fits you and how you're made.

Yes, you can familiarize yourself with the two areas of apologetics that make you reticent - but you may never become an expert in those areas...and may never have to. That doesn't disqualify you at all. There's no rule in the apologetics world that says that you must be proficient in science to enjoy apologetics and bring that joy to other believers.

[Daniel Gracely]

Hi Youssarian,
The followoing points are numbered, but not necessarily given in the order of their importance.

First, know that other apologists share your same fears. Even Paul asked that others pray that he might be bold in sharing the gospel. Every fear you have I’ve had myself. Some I still have. You’re not alone. For what it’s worth, I’m nearly 53 and I’ve heard and read a lot of atheist and agnostic arguments. But I finally feel pretty good about how Christianity stacks up against them. Yes, their arguments may at first intimidate you. But at base they have no answer for the great questions of the day and of historic philosophy: the Problem of the One and the Many; The Problem of Choice or Fate; the Problem of Evil (indeed, even its ontological status); The Problem of Life or Suicide.

Second, know that consistency of argument is no test of the truth. Often people are fooled into supposing their opponent must be right, when, in fact, all their opponent is doing is presenting arguments consistent with his presuppositions. Anyone highly clever can do this. Therefore remember that the Bible is superior because of certain predictive prophecies that have been fulfilled.

Third, remember that God gives us sufficient, not startling, evidence. At least generally that is the case. God’s dilemma is to convince people NOT just of His power but ALSO of His goodness. This is why Jesus did not move the sun about in the heavens by pointing his finger at the sky and waving it back and forth. For had Jesus moved the sun in this manner, people would have worshiped him out of intimidation. But, obviously, they would not have believed he was good, since they knew he had coerced their belief. And so they would believe in his power, but not in his goodness. Unbelievers who demand the “incontrovertible” proof of signs in the heaven, or that God must strike them with lightning to prove He exists, are misguided. God does not reveal Himself at the expense of his goodness, anymore than a Christian OBGYN would accept the condition that he perform an abortion to prove he’s a doctor.

Fourth, realize that the mathematician/philosopher, Kurt Gődel, Einstein’s friend, has proved that every ideology, philosophy, and religion relies at some point on one or more faith-axioms, because it runs into the wall of logical contradiction at some point. This is true even of Christianity. For example, according to Zeno’s paradox, if there are infinite points of time between any two points of time, then motion should be impossible. Yet in Christianity we believe in a God who is without beginning and end, yet acts in history. So why should people believe Christianity sooner than any other ideology, since both Christianity and opposing systems contain logical contradictions? Answer: because the Bible has proved its superiority through fulfilled prophecy. (I also believe the Shroud of Turin is another incontrovertible proof.) And so, in a few cases God’s logic is something only He understands. That is, it is not illogical to Him that He is without beginning and end, yet able to act. However, these few exceptions prove the general rule that usually we must appeal to logic.

Fifth, realize that your opponents define words differently than their normal sense. Calvinists do this all the time, violating dictionary definitions. (So do atheists, whose arguments are very similar to Calvinists in key instances.) Calvinists, for example, claim that man has freedom but no liberty. Therefore (says the Calvinist) man can choose, but can only choose one thing. Note here that Calvinists thus implicitly define “freedom” and “liberty” as though they are in some way not synonyms, when, in fact, they are. And observe also that to say that man has a choice but only of one thing, is to change the meaning of the word choice. For one cannot choose between one thing. That kind of logical contradiction is not upheld by the Bible, if we take words to mean what they normally mean. Remember, even in those cases where God's logic surpasses ours, we know when to grant the exception, because we understand words in their normal sense about God having no beginning nor end, and his ability to act in history. Re: Choice; as for instances in which the Bible has been translated to read, e.g.: "No man CAN come to the Son except the Father draw him," which lead Calvinists to claim that man according to his nature can only choose one thing (the rejecting of God), I explain in my book on my website how the Greek word translated "can" sometimes means "wills to" or "may", based on the lexical evidence. In short, the Calvinist claim has no basis.

Sixth, remember the old adage, “The Devil has many tools; but the handle that fits them all is called “Discouragement”. If you truly have the gift of knowledge, you will often be discouraged. Church people may wonder why you always seem contentious, why you are divisive, why you don’t care about the unity of the Body, blah, blah. I believe the gift of knowledge is one of the uncomely gifts. I suppose this is because people don’t like to be corrected by someone with accurate knowledge. So don’t expect thanks or appreciation, especially from anyone on an online forum. He’s especially feeling pressure to keep up his end of the argument because it's a public venue, and he doesn’t want to look stupid. Finally, remember that Solomon said, “with much knowledge comes much grief.” This is because the person with knowledge foresees the troubles ahead for society and for the Church, when others do not. It's a lonely burden.

Seventh, keep in mind that no one knows everything. No matter how much you study, it will be impossible for you to familiarize and anticipate every possible argument that can be brought against you. At some point you simply have to enter the stream of confrontation, where it can get ugly. As Proverbs tells us, if a righteous man contends with a fool, whether there is jesting or solemn argument, there is no rest. Personally, I don’t engage atheists or agnostics often. IMO atheists are particularly arrogant and stubborn, and I’m not interested in wearing myself out from the exasperation that comes when peopole refuse to listen to sound argument. Remember, they believe everything in the universe has come into its grand order all on its own. So, unless they're willing to consider the truth of fulfilled prophecy or the evidnece of the Shroud of Turin, I don't see how you can get through to them. I only engage them in the hope that onlookers will consider Christian arguments. I never (or at least, rarely) expect that I will have any impact on the actual person(s) I'm debating. I do it for 3rd party readers.

Eighth, don’t rule out the use of sarcasm. This advice seems implied in the verses that instruct us NOT to answer a fool according to his folly, yet DO answer a fool according to his folly. We DO assume his argument long enough to show the absurd implications of his presuppositions; we DON’T assume his argument long enough to give him the superior truth of the Bible. When it comes to sarcasm, I tend to become aggressive if someone first becomes aggressive with me. To the weak God shows Himself weak, and to the strong God shows Himself strong. Probably we should do no less. Christ used sarcasm sparingly, but He wasn’t above using it, even with unbelievers. For example, He said, “I have shown you many good works from my Father; for which of them are you stoning me?” Paul, too, used sarcasm with those Corinthians who thought themselves superior to him. There is even some evidence that Paul departed likewise from those Athenians who mocked him. Apparently, he was prepared for a game of sarcastic one-upmanship with mockers of the gospel, if only that it might mean protecting the new faith of those Athenians who had begun believing.

Ninth, become informed enough about your opponent’s view, so that if you had to, you could argue it in his absence. For example, suppose there was a public seminar in which various views were to be presented, including yours. But one of your opponents' cars has broken down, and he won't be there to give his argument. Could you in his absence share what his essential views are? If you can, then probably you have also studied enough to know why his arguments are wrong. When addressing the Athenians, Paul knew enough Greek culture to quote two of their own poets word for word, and thus was able to contrast the Christian view with Stoicism and Epicureanism. He kept his friends close. He kept his enemies closer. Not really, but you get the picture.

Tenth, remember Who gives the gift of knowledge. When studying apologetics, it is sometimes hard to know what thoughts we ourselves originate, and what thoughts God may have presented to us. Since He is the author of all truth, remember to pray to Him to know the truth.

Eleventh, look for the Achilles heel in your opponent’s argument. Is he an atheist who claims everything is materiality, yet discriminates by waiting for the bus to pass by instead of throwing himself under it? Is he David Hume, who is skeptical about everything but skepticism? Is he a Christian professor trying to intimidate you by asking what are your Hebrew language credentials, as if to imply that everyone with his level of formal training agrees on controversial doctrinal points, which, of course, isn't true. All arguments not in line with the truth have their Achilles heel. Look for them.

Twelfth, don’t ruin your health doing apologetics. I’ve done that, and it’s not worth it. You seem to have the same nervous disposition as I, and it will cause you trouble if you’re not careful. You can let yourself get overwhelmed wondering why so much falsity is taught and goes unchallenged in the Church. It’s just the way it is. It’s the mystery of iniquity. And so expect nothing or next to nothing from most pastors who 'guide' these churches. Get them off the pedestal. They’re salaried professionals whose house mortgage literally depends on keeping the sheep going in the same direction. He and they are not interested in spending a lot of time dissecting ideas you’ve discovered about the Bible and that excite you. Remember, the words of wise are heard in quiet. And when debating online, don’t feel obligated to keep repeating your points because your opponent responds as if he hasn’t heard you. Just tell him that you’re winding down your comments, and you trust that 3rd party readers will review all you’ve written, lest they suppose you haven’t already answered his repeated objections.

Thirteenth, have a support system. I go to my older brother when all else fails. If he doesn’t have the answer, our conversation often directly or indirectly gets me thinking in a new direction. Feel free to call upon me until you find someone. Google my name “Daniel Gracely” and it will bring you to my home page, where my email address is. You can write me there. If you can find someone in person it’s even better.

Fourteenth, stay teachable. It wasn’t until I was 47 that I changed my mind about the doctrine of original sin; I was 50 when I changed my view about the doctrine of eternal security. I felt relieved to discover the one, but grieved to discover the other. But the apologist must follow the truth wherever it leads, no matter what.

Fifteenth, don’t give credentialism a free pass. If I had blindly followed the standard lexicons, I never would have discovered many truths about the Bible. Don’t kid yourself; lexicon entries are sometimes influenced by translations based on exegesis done according to a theologian’s particular presuppositions. There’s much less objectivity among Christian scholars than is generally realized. Sure, read the lexicons. But also do your due diligence. If, for example, Thayer’s lexicon gives a definition for “regeneration” that is Calvinistic but at odds with what the word means in extra-biblical literature, don’t trust the lexicon. Extra-biblical writings are the control groups designed to keep theologians honest. Remember the saying, “Some mistakes only a theologian can make.”

Sixteenth, remember that all knowledge is assumptive, including your opponents'. Don’t allow the atheist to speak as if his statements have been facts in evidence since the origin of the universe. Even the existence of reality is questioned by some persons in this world, so no statement is self-evident in the sense that every human being agrees with it. This is why there’s no such thing as “proving” an idea, if by “proving” we mean that presenting a certain fact or set of facts guarantees its immediate acceptance. Though the Christian believes God’s proofs, wisdom will always be foolishness to the fool. Yet if you feel led, don't be afraid to challenge the atheist on his most basic assumptions. It's popular, for example, for them to suppose evolution was proved long ago. Thus they seem oblivious about how erroneous Science has been in much smaller, practical matters. For example, a year before the President's official medical advisory board wrote the proposal that routine screening through PSA (prostate specific antigen) testing should be discontinued, I advised a close relative not to get a prostate biopsy if the only basis was an elevated PSA number. I based my advice on the work of Michael Karin, a researcher working out of the USC at San Diego. Today, in hindsight it is estimated that up to one million men underwent unnecessary clinical treatment due to PSA screening. The question is thus begged: If in so narrow a matter Science was shown false, why would anyone regard so vast a theory as evolution as proved? For after a hundred years of the fossil record failing to prove slow and uniform evolutionary change, the Darwinian hypothesis mutated into its current theory of punctuated equilbirum, which states that evolution happens so fast yet incredibly rarely, it's unlikely an evolutionary event will ever be witnessed. Yeah. Uh-huh.

Seventeenth, give the consequences to God. Most apologists are seed sowers, not evangelists. On this side of life you will probably not know what effect most of your work has had. But the Bible tells us we will reap in the end, if we faint not. Besides this, remember Jesus' words, that "men ought always to pray, and not to faint."

Godspeed,

Daniel Gracely

[Youssarian]

Thick skin soft heart, as they say (better than soft skin and tough heart). If someone is getting antagonistic then you may want to re-consider why they are engaging with you, and that perhaps it may be better to reconvene or stop altogether with that particular person for a time. Internet apologetics, by the way, isn't necessarily the best thing to get involved in.

I want to get into IRL evangelism/apologetics... but unfortunately, I don't really have much of an IRL group of people that would support me with it. :/

[chad]

Cliffe Knechtle has a TV program - Give me answer. I've seen him debate with non-Christians in science and philosophy and does quite well. Here is his website: www.givemeananswer.org

This may be a good place to look for some advice.

[Athanasius]

I want to get into IRL evangelism/apologetics... but unfortunately, I don't really have much of an IRL group of people that would support me with it. :/

Why not start one yourself?

[Watchman]

Excellent advice here...especially from Daniel G! My upper levels of education are in science, as are my Dad's. He was constantly under attack from his colleagues for teaching evolution as theory. (He was a professor of Biology for 33 years.) Like him, it amazes me that folks try to use the study of God's creation (ie science) to disprove His words, His existence, and His works.

[Youssarian]

Why not start one yourself?

From what I've gauged, maybe one or two of my acquaintances are interested in apologetics/evangelism, but that's about it.

[Athanasius]

From what I've gauged, maybe one or two of my acquaintances are interested in apologetics/evangelism, but that's about it.

Two or three are better than one, and who knows, maybe more would become interested.

[Bandit]

... Most science does tend to be neutral concerning God. ...

Well, I would not say that.

[Vanderhoven7]

There are however, two main obstacles stopping me from fully engaging in it. First of all apologetics often deals with non-Christians in science and philosophy. And these people can come up with really good scientific and philosophical arguments that could cast doubt on one or more of the lines of reasoning that I've learned of so far.... I think part of this problem involves when people I'm talking to say stuff that I haven't heard of before. They say something so complex that it blows me out of the water, and it seems they have disproved my line of reasoning for God. And of course, I'm afraid to venture on Google and look it up, lest I find even more that agrees with them.

Glad you love apologetics.

Wikipedia outlines a variety of apologetic content areas

1 Biblical inspiration
2 History
2.1 Modern apologetics
3 Varieties
3.1 Historical and legal evidentialism
3.2 Defense of miracles
3.3 Prophetic fulfillment
3.4 Biblical apologetics
3.5 Philosophical apologetics
3.5.1 Presuppositional apologetics
3.6 Moral apologetics
3.7 Scientific apologetics
3.8 Creationist apologetics
3.9 Experiential apologetics

It seems to me that we cannot master all content areas. We each have to evaluate our gifts, abilities and education/knowledge. I've seen Christian apologists absolutely dominate/trounce Bible-bashing Atheistic science professors....because they knew their stuff; the arguments and counter-arguments. I have no interest in entering that fray.

However, counter cult apologetics interests me...and since I have had roots in Jehovah's Witnesses, my main focus is their extra-biblical beliefs.
I feel confident when facing Witnesses, even their "big guns" so-called, because I have studied know what they believe and what fights to pick.

[TrustGzus]

I think part of this problem involves when people I'm talking to say stuff that I haven't heard of before. They say something so complex that it blows me out of the water, and it seems they have disproved my line of reasoning for God. And of course, I'm afraid to venture on Google and look it up, lest I find even more that agrees with them.

This paragraph caught my eye. I think many times, particularly on the internet, people will counter with things that frankly, they don't understand very well themselves. But they'll try to sound like they do. They try to intimidate.

I used to have the exact kind of fears you are expressing. The longer I stayed with studying the issues, the more peace I got.

Hang in there. Keep studying. Keep learning. They can't prove truth to be an error.