June 24, 2004
How should Christians practice Apologetics?
I recently read an interesting article by Doug Giles called A Biblical Defense for Giving Offense that I thought was very interesting. Mr. Giles makes the argument that throughout Scripture (and in the early Church), Apologists for God weren't overly nice. His point:
As I see it, much of the clergy, the church, Christian music and Christian literature have become pathetically soft and have lost their holy punch.If you don’t believe me, then take this Nestea challenge: From now on when you read the scripture, pay close attention when you land on a chunk of text in which Moses, Joshua, David, Elijah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, John the Baptist, Paul or Jesus is engaged in dialogue with an idiotic idolater, a pompous Pharisee or a vacillating vixen.
Know what? You won’t see these searing saints doling out nicely-nicely stuff all day and night. Not a bit of it: they’ll be challenging—oft times ridiculing--the very ground the impenitent unbeliever or the feigned professor stands on. Not only that. You will rarely see God’s holy ones repenting of the verbal invectives they have aimed at their audience’s willful blindness.
I tend to agree with Mr. Giles. Back in my protestant days, if engaged by a "nice" apologist, I would merely have a discussion with the guy and walk away. However, if someone got under my skin or told me clearly that I was wrong, I would go back and do research; basically I got mad and was determined to prove the other person wrong. This type of research lends itself to achieving the apologists' goal: conversion. It was those who weren't trying to be my friend during the discussions that ultimately convicted me of my ignorance. Mr. Giles ends this way:
If … if … we truly desire revival, reform and a national renaissance, then get ready for the spiritual wrecking cranes, i.e., the prophets, to come in. When the prophets poked the pompous … when they mocked the haughty and religiously arrogant … when they wreaked havoc on stale religious and political symbolism: they were clearing the ground for fresh, godly growth. I know it may seem ugly at times, but it can be fun, and it can effect change. That is, if we understand it, cheer it on and yield to it … especially when it’s aimed at us.
What do you think? On this site we're occasionally accused of being too hard or sarcastic, etc., but Mr. Giles (a protestant by the way) seems to think some of this is necessary. Take a minute and read the full article - it's very interesting. One of my co-bloggers emailed Mr. Giles and invited him to our site after reading the article. I wonder what he would think?
God bless,
Jay
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Jay,
I have read your posts and exchange with others. It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself that you believe the correct way.
Posted by: Robert at June 25, 2004 12:02 AMRobert,
I have read your comment. It sounds to me like you are trying to convince yourself that you are correct in believing that Jay is just posting to convince himself that he believes the correct way.
In Christ,
Joe
Robert,
Just to set the record straight, I know I have the Truth. I'm simply trying to offer it to you and others. The joy inside me demands that I tell others about it!
God bless,
Jay
why do some apologetics seem haughty even toward other apologetics of the christian faith even when these apologetics seem to by the word of God prove the others methods wrong? causing the other apologeic to become haughty and wise in his on conceit and say ,for example: "Solomon was being or feeling mundane when he said that or was referring to that." how do they know?! it sounds they then try to defend themselves and their own point of veiw and opinion, to keep from looking stupid or that they may actually be wrong themselves, than what the scripture is truely saying or implying,almost being skeptical of what God's word is really saying. that kind of defeats the purpose of being an apologetic defending the faith doesn't it ? . I think this is the biggest problem in apologetics ,then again thats my own opinion on this subject. maybe i'm just being skeptical of the method of apologetics.
Posted by: jana at September 13, 2005 01:51 PMJana, I've noticed a remarkable difference in the tone of Catholic apologetics since the second Vatican Council. While all the material contains sound reasoning, the newer stuff takes a more humble tone.
Another thing I have noticed about Protestant apologetics is that the best stuff comes from pre-reformation sources and that Catholics often neglect or reject such ways of thinking simply because it was said by a Protestant. Imagine my surprise when I learned that Protestants had upheld and embraced the Catholic Traditions of apologetics better than the Catholics!
Posted by: Broken Record at September 15, 2005 11:20 AM
