Bishop Polycarp (A.D. 69-155) of Smyrna, apologist and friend of the Apostle John, died a martyr's death when he refused to recant his faith. Following a failed attempt to burn him alive, he was fatally stabbed. When implored to renounce his faith, Polycarp replied, "Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me any injury: how then can I blaspheme my King and my Savior?"

Polycarp

Introduction to Apologetics

The very word "apologetics" comes from the legal world of ancient Greece. Specifically, the defendent made an "apology" (Greek apologia), or defense, to the charges brought against him. When Socrates defended himself against charges of heresy, his student Plato retold the defense in a famous treatise called The Apology contained in his famous Dialogues. Notice Paul's "defense" in Acts 22:1 and his "defense" to detractors in 1 Cor. 9:3. Peter pressed Christians to ready themselves to make a defense (Gk. apologia) in case they were asked about their faith by an unbeliever (1 Pet. 3:15).

When the apostles passed off the scene and Christianity entered its second and third generations, new opponents launched assaults against the faith once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3). In response God raised up fearless defenders, called apologists, such as Justin Martyr,Tertullian, and other capable saints.

Apologists seek to present a rational basis for faith, respond to the objections of unbelief, and destroy the foolishness of non-Christian worldviews. In general, apologetics seeks to set forth the claims of the Bible and persuade people of the truth of Christian claims.

Theory of Apologetics

The Presuppositional Approach

Presuppositionalists do not have an optimistic view on man's ability to "figure out God." Citing Rom. 1:19-21, they point to man's continual suppression of the truth and reluctance to seek further truth. Hence, people are driven by their presuppositions. Thus when we try to discuss matters of deep principle and religion, we cannot really make an appealing argument. Two key arguments presuppositionalists use are:

  • Autonomous thinking cannot arrive at the truth apart from God's revelation. Man in his self-sufficiency rebels against God's Word and needs to repent and receive the truth as God revealed it in His Word. On his own, man's true motives rise to the top and he or she will steer thinking in the direction of the way they want to go regardless of it truth or rationality.
  • The fall impaired man's thinking so much he or she can no longer think rationally in the spiritual/moral realm (though they might demonstrate clear thinking at times in other disciplines).
  • This approach honors Scripture and follows biblical precedent (how the Apostles tended to argue).

The presuppositionalist, therefore, does not set out to find common ground with the nonbeliever (except perhaps as an ice-breaker prior to serious conversation) but instead sets out to destroy the opponents argument by showing its irrationality. All facts and thinking should be built upon God's Word and His clear revelation in Scripture. So when the presuppositionalist engages the nonbeliever he or she does so indirectly by attacking their basic "presuppositions."

Also, the presuppositionalist appeals to that sense of God within all of us (Rom. 1:19) and does not accept at face value man's claim not to believe in God. Our plea is that he relinquish unbelieving presuppositions so he can think clearly and know the very God he suppresses. Hence we should not try to target man's intellect, but his heart. After all, God commands us to believe (Matt. 3:2; 4:17; John 14:1; Acts 16:31).

For a thorough glossary of some common presuppositional terms (or "Van Tilian" terms), click here.

The Classical Approach

The classical approach employs logic (such as the law of noncontradiction, coherence, and pointing out logical fallacies) when evaluating different worldviews or religions. In testing the rationale of competing beliefs, the classical apologist refutes these alternate beliefs and builds a case for Christianity using "theistic proofs," such as the cosmological argument (an argument that points to God as the ultimate cause or source), to prove the existence of God.

The classical apolologist first seeks to establish God's existence prior to any meaningful discussion on other evidences. Otherwise, we have no framework with which to work in. Standing alone, this form of argument expects too much from the human intellect and presupposes human autonomy (i.e., man can reason himself to God independently, but see 1 Cor. 2:14).

The Evidentialist Approach

Major Advocates: Joseph Butler, John Warwick Montgomery, and many modern apologists. Evidentialists attempt to prove the major tenets of the Christian faith, such as the reliability of the Bible and the resurrection, by pointing to scientific, empirical facts. They try to begin their conversations with advocates of other belief systems on "common ground," then slowly examine the facts of both systems to build a case for Christianity. Once they have defended the major tenets, they then build a probable cause defense of the Christian faith. They believe they can build a "most likely case" for Christianity and show such a belief is not unreasonable. Hence the "classical" approach above stresses rationality, and the evidential approach uses evidences or science to defend Christianity. They will engage unbelievers on virtually any topic, such as the historic reliability of the Bible or the resurrection, and tend to assume the possibility that those people can think objectively on the presented evidences.