Apologetics

Apologetics

Kunoy Island, Denmark (photo from trekearth.com)

Part 1: Preface from July 6, 2023

Published originally September 27, 2007, well before completing my PhD work, and an early article on this website. This article is revised with significant revisions. A major reason for the significant revising is that once I had done the PhD work, I further realized that although apologetics has is importance; I am personally far more interested in philosophical theology within the Reformed tradition and theistic philosophy of religion. But of course, both are connected to apologetics.

Notably discussed in the also recently revised article

Monday, July 24, 2017 Opines on Philosophy of Religion and Apologetics

Part II: apologian

From New Testament Greek, in First Peter 3:15, the Christian is told to provide an answer to others concerning the hope he/she has in the Christian faith. The word ‘answer’ in the Greek from First Peter is apologian (apologian). The Greek New Testament (1993: 793).

5 versions from New Testament.com

Five versions in New Testament Greek from 1 Peter 3: 15.

ἀπολογία: Blue Letter Bible

The Blue Letter Bible has Strong's G627 cited for the initial version of the word.

This is defined a plea, an answer (for self), clearing of self, defence. Strong (1986: 16). The English word ‘apologetics’ comes from the Greek root word. Hoover (1996: 68). William Barclay writes that a defence of the Christian faith must be reasonable. Barclay (1976: 230-231). What a Christian believes should be stated intelligently and intelligibly. Barclay. (1976: 230-231) The Christian needs to go through the mental and spiritual toil of reasoning out the faith, so he/she can tell others effectively. Barclay (1976: 230-231). 

Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling write that apologetics is the formal defence of the Christian faith, and Christian theologians have often differed on the appropriate way to present this defence. Grenz, Guretzki and Nordling (1999: 13). There have been various appeals to rational argumentation, empirical evidence, fulfilled prophecy, church authorities and mystical experience. Grenz, Guretzki and Nordling (1999: 13-14).

Hoover notes that there are different approaches to apologetics, including the Revelation School of thought which is a part of the Objective School which reasons that objective evidence such as miracles and rational proofs for God are important, but that the unregenerate person cannot be converted by intellectual proofs alone. Hoover (1996: 69-70). A person must be regenerated by the Holy Spirit and the use of truth. Hoover (1996: 69-70). The Natural Theology School which is also part of the Objective School places much emphasis on human reason and philosophy that will persuade the unbeliever to a belief in Christianity. Hoover (1996: 69-70). The Subjective School typically doubts that the unbeliever can be argued into the faith, but places emphasis on personal experience and a subjective encounter with God. Hoover (1996: 69). Sin can be understood to blind human reason and therefore persons are in need of a personal experience with God. Hoover (1996: 69).

I use mainly biblical theology, philosophical theology and philosophy of religion, as opposed to apologetics. However, in agreement with some apologetic approaches, I primarily favour an objective approach within my academic work, to a subjective one. This being stated, I fully acknowledge that God must change a human heart for a person to embrace the Gospel. I reason that God can use reason from philosophical and empirical sources in the regeneration (John 3, Titus 3, 1 Peter 1 as examples) process. It is God and not intellectual concepts in themselves that convert a person, but God can use human means to work divine spiritual plans. I reason that intellect and personal experience should work together in order that a Christian has a faith and philosophy within a worldview, that he/she understands reasonably well and can share with others in an effective way. 

As I favour biblical theology, philosophical theology and philosophy of religion, I realize that sometimes my work is controversial, but I also attempt to be respectful and open-minded. I revise my own work regularly. There are plenty of very good and useful ‘lighter’ and more pleasant Christian websites out there, and I am willing to link with many of these, but I reason that a ministry God has given me online is to struggle with some difficult theological and philosophical issues and then present them in written form. This will not always be popular and within academic theology there is often a lack of support from Christian academics for one another, if they differ on secondary issues. But, I reason that Christian academic thinkers and writers should (at least theoretically) unite under the essentials and then respectfully discuss secondary disagreements.

BARCLAY, WILLIAM (1976) The Letters of James and Peter, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.

GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press. 

GEISLER, NORMAN L. (1975) Philosophy of Religion, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

GEISLER, NORMAN L. (1978) The Roots of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

GEISLER, NORMAN L. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.

GRENZ, STANLEY J., DAVID GURETZKI AND CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.

HOOVER, A.J. (1996) ‘Apologetics’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

MARTIN, WALTER (1985) The Kingdom of The Cults, Minneapolis, Bethany House Publishers.

STRONG, J. (1986) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Pickering, Ontario, Welch Publishing Company.

THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT (1993) Stuttgart, United Bible Societies.