Apologetics and Integrity

One of the dangers of apologetics is that we can get completely focused on winning arguments or bringing in converts to Christianity.  There is nothing wrong with those things.  We want both to happen.  But when they are our complete focus, there can be a temptation to let our integrity slide.

How does that happen?  We can feel the need to pad our arguments, relying upon quantity rather than quality.  We can share stories and supposed facts without checking for accuracy, betting that those we talk to won’t check either.  We can rely on the power of rhetoric rather than the simple Gospel.  Unfortunately, some Christians have even been caught enhancing their own testimony to the point of making it more fiction than reality.  Others toss out biblical texts without any concern for context, hoping that the sheer weight of biblical authority will carry the argument.

The Apostle Paul wrote: “But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God.” (2 Corinthians 4:2 ESV)  This is such an important reminder.  Our job is not to produce results with our own impressive skills but to present the  truth, to be faithful to God’s word.  We must flee from the short cuts, even though that might make things more difficult in the short run.  We must be transparent and proclaim the Gospel with a life of integrity.  The moment we let go of our integrity, our ministry literally can disintegrate.  What we need to do is be faithful to God, proclaim the truth and leave the results in God’s hands.

Annihilationism and Evangelism

I was recently listening to a podcast about annihilationism, that is the belief that the wicked do not suffer for eternity in hell but are simply destroyed.  I am not planning on discussing the merits of this view at the present time.  But it did make me think about another talk I heard about the dangers of believing in annihilationism.  Aside from any biblical interpretation issues (and there is some biblical support, otherwise people like John Stott would never hold to it), there were some practical concerns.  This person suggested that if annihilationism was true that we would have no more Gospel to preach.  After all, if the worst that could happen to us was to be destroyed, why bother becoming a Christian?

Again, I am not interested in discussing here the merits of annihilationism.  What I am concerned about is the nature of the Gospel.  Is the threat of an eternity of suffering really essential to the Gospel?  If annihilationsim was true, would you still want to be a Christian?

From my perspective, annihilation still seems to be pretty severe punishment.  I do not hear criminals willing to risk crimes because the potential sentence is only death and not life at hard labour.  Besides, the alternative to either hell or annihilation is not just existence but rather an eternity of joy, peace, love and the presence of God.  The motivation to become a Christian is not just the avoiding of the bad but the gaining of the good.

How does this affect evangelism?  It should not matter what you believe about the fate of the wicked, all Christians should want to share the good news.  It is not about whether the punishment is severe or not (and it is), it is about what the reward is that we dare not miss.  The Gospel that Jesus preached was that the Kingdom of God was at hand.  Jesus left it fairly vague as to what would happen to the wicked, but he was clear that God’s Kingdom was something amazing, that it was something that we should desire in this life and seek to enjoy for all eternity.  Perhaps the problem with evangelism today is not that people lack fear of hell but rather we are not explaining the nature of the eternal life that is found in Jesus Christ.  If we did, they would see how the pleasures of life without God could never compare.

How to Share Your Faith Apologetically

I recently saw a question about apologetic related resources for a clear Gospel presentation.  My immediate reaction was: How do you have one Gospel presentation that fits everyone from the atheist to the Muslim to the nominal Christian?  I know there are evangelism programs out there that are designed as a simple presentation to be used with any person.  I am skeptical of their usefulness.  So do we just give up?  Or do we stay unprepared and trust that God will give us all the words?  Prayer is important but there is a place for us to be developing our skills.  I see the best pattern as being Paul’s experience in Athens in Acts 17.

“Now while Paul was waiting for them at Athens, his spirit was provoked within him as he saw that the city was full of idols. So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the devout persons, and in the marketplace every day with those who happened to be there. Some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers also conversed with him. And some said, “What does this babbler wish to say?” Others said, “He seems to be a preacher of foreign divinities”—because he was preaching Jesus and the resurrection. And they took him and brought him to the Areopagus, saying, “May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? For you bring some strange things to our ears. We wish to know therefore what these things mean.” Now all the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there would spend their time in nothing except telling or hearing something new. So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: “Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man,nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, for “‘In him we live and move and have our being’; as even some of your own poets have said, “‘For we are indeed his offspring.’ Being then God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man. The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.” Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked. But others said, “We will hear you again about this.” So Paul went out from their midst. But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them.” (Acts 17:16–34 ESV)

I am not going to develop this into a pre-packaged system but I will make some observations.

1. Notice that Paul was offended by the idolatry he saw.  Making connections does not mean we must be accepting of all things.  The key was that Paul did not let that offence drive his conversation.

2. Paul begins by speaking to those he had most in common with.  He did not stay there, but used that as a way of expanding his circle.

3. Paul responded to questions.  Although he approached the synagogue, he was asked to come to the Areopagus.  Remember that 1 Peter 3:15 does not say be aggressive with those not interested, but be ready for those who ask.

4. Paul saw the best in his audience.  Even though they were worshipping false gods, he saw that they were at least religious.  Everyone has something good for us to respect.

5. We find that Paul took the time to tour the city and find out what they actually believed.  Don’t assume you know what a Mormon or Jehovah’s Witness believes.  Do some research and make sure to listen to adherents of other faiths.

6. Paul knew enough about their beliefs to quote some of their authors.  Don’t be afraid to read the Qur’an or Book of Mormon or Richard Dawkins.

7. Paul started where they had the most in common, that is as people created somehow to live in this world.  Find those common areas and build a bridge there.

8. Paul does not quote Scripture to these people who were ignorant of the Hebrew Bible.  Don’t quote the Bible to unchurched people and expect them to be impressed the way your church friends are.  Speak biblical truth, but don’t assume knowledge or understanding of the Bible.

9. Paul stays very focused.  He does not go off on every side issue or obscure doctrine.  He only talks about the basics: that God is real and that he has done something to make himself known.

10. Paul does not share as much as we would expect.  At the Areopagus, Paul does not mention Jesus by name (just as the man appointed by God) and does not mention the cross (although he does the resurrection).  We can feel the pressure to get the whole story across in one conversation.  It seems as if Paul just wants to move them closer to the real God and that he is successful as a number of people desired to know more.  Be happy to get the person closer to the truth and don’t feel the need to get the person converted, baptized and discipled all in one conversation.

As I said, this is not an evangelism plan.  It is simply ten observations of the deeds of a man who was pretty good at sharing his faith.  There is much that we can learn from Paul.

Two Rules For Witnessing

A basic element of Christianity is sharing the Good News of what God has done in Jesus Christ.  But witnessing is not always done well, not just in effectiveness but in terms of ethics.  I like these two rules for witnessing that theologian Miroslav Volf offers:

1. Witness to others only if you are prepared to let them witness to you.

2. Witness to others in the way you think others should witness to you.

Ethics of Evangelism

What are your thoughts on proselytization?  Most people have strong feelings, few just don’t care.  Many evangelicals strongly emphasize the sharing of their faith (although they would prefer the term evangelism to proselytization).  Some Christians have sincere personal beliefs but do not think that it is fair to share those with others, respecting people’s existing religious beliefs.  Some people are deeply offended by any proselytization and would like it banned by law (it already is in some work contexts).  Even many evangelicals dread the sight of Mormons or Jehovah’s Witnesses on the doorstep.  What do we make of all this?

Odds are that although people have strong feelings on the issue, they have not thought deeply on it.  Much of what passes for conversation on proselytization is more emotion than anything.  That is why I am thankful for Elmer Thiessen’s Ethics of Evangelism: A Philosophical Defence of Ethical Proselytizing and Persuasion.  Few have ever considered the ethics of evangelism.  Thiessen provides a major contribution to the subject, examining the question of whether proselytizing can ever be ethical.  While acknowledging many of the abuses, Thiessen provides a solid philosophical defence.  The author demonstrates that proselytizing goes on all the time (e.g. Apple vs PC), and that religious content cannot make it unethical.  While the freedom of the person not wanting to be proselytized must be respected, so must the freedom of the religious person to proselytize.  Thiessen demonstrates that the presence of proselytization, religious or otherwise, is a benefit to society.  At the same time, Thiessen calls Christian to hold firm to ethical standards of evangelism.  Even such popular tactics as “friendship evangelism” be unethical if we pretend to be friends just to get a religious conversion.  This book is well researched, written in readable style and dealing with an issue important to both religious and non-religious people.  I highly recommend this book, especially for people actively involved in evangelistic, apologetic or pastoral ministry.

How to Do Apologetics

I have been having some interesting conversations with some fellow apologists connected with the Christian Apologetics Alliance.  A question was asked about where we need work in apologetics.  My burden is that we get back to 1 Peter 3:15, speaking to people with gentleness and respect.  Christians have to choose what role they see for apologetics.  We can be sick of critics attacking us and choose to hit back or we can have a desire to deal with questions to help real people make room for faith.  Someone in our conversation reminded me of this verse that I thought I needed to share here:

“Walk in wisdom toward outsiders, making the best use of the time. Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.” (Colossians 4:5–6 ESV)

Our speech is not to be biting, devastating or attacking but rather to be gracious.  It would be worth asking for each person interested in apologetics if the thing that we have just said is indeed gracious.

Careful With Your Claims

Most people involved in apologetics or evangelism want to make their case as strong as possible.  There are two ways to do that: quantity and quality.  Many people prefer quantity.  There is a desire to pile up argument upon argument upon argument, overwhelming the person with the sheer weight of what is presented.  Unfortunately, to do this some of the arguments are often a bit of a stretch.  We quote people without reading the context, we share hearsay, we do not check our facts and so on.  Sometimes this has shown up in how people have shared their own testimony.  Sincerely wanting to have their testimony touch people, points are exaggerated, truth is stretched until it is no longer the real testimony.  The problem is that the truth always comes out.  Better to have a few arguments that you know that you have done your homework on, or share a less exciting testimony that is based on hard truth.  When people find out you have exaggerated on somethings, it cast doubts on other things you say, even if it is the truth.  Careful restraint is a virtue when it comes to apologetics and evangelism.

“Whoever speaks the truth gives honest evidence, but a false witness utters deceit.” (Proverbs 12:17 ESV)

When It’s Wrong to Be Right: Conversion

One of the things that some people do not like about conservative Christianity is the focus on converting people who are not Christians.  The attractive thing about liberal Christianity is that it can focus on the moral and ethical teachings of Jesus, encouraging us to better people, without taking the offensive step of conversion.

I can understand why this is difficult.  I remember as a non-Christian working for some Christians who attempted to convert me.  I did not particularly enjoy it.  But at the same time, I do not think spreading the Christian message with a hope of people embracing it is a bad thing.  First of all, as important as the moral and ethical teachings of Jesus are, it is also central to Jesus’ teachings that following him is essential for a good afterlife.  While at times, the eighty or so years on this planet seem like a long time, it is only a drop in the bucket when it comes to human history, not to mention eternity.  The fact is that we will be dead a lot longer than we will be alive.  If we take steps to have the best possible life, why not take the steps to have the best possible afterlife?  According to the New Testament, eternal life is found through faith in Jesus Christ and what he did on the cross.

Now you may disagree with an afterlife or the necessity of atonement.  You may think there is no afterlife or you may think that everyone goes to heaven.  But for a moment, put yourself in the place of an evangelical Christian.  If you truly believed that you had a message that would have a life and death impact on the people you cared about, what would you do?  Would you withhold the information required for eternal life for the sake of tolerance?  I know if someone had the cure for a deadly disease that I would hope they would share that information with me.  I might not believe them, but I would at least want the option to choose.

At the same time, I will admit that Christians have not always been the best at sharing their faith.  Sometimes conservative Christians have forced religion down people’s throats, imposing a “turn or burn” message on people.  I believe that the Christian message must be shared, but it must be shared with love and respect.  Conversions are not for notches on a Bible cover, they should be attempts to share important information with the people we care about.  When it has not been that, the church needs to repent.

Evangelicious

I must confess that I hate the word “evangelize.”  It is not that it is too “churchy” of a word.  Nor is it the part about evangel.  Evangel is based on a Greek word for “good news.”  We have Good News, and we should share the Good News.  The problem I have is the “ize” part.  Evangelism sounds like something that you do to someone.  ”Jesus died for your sins.  There, you have been officially evangelized.”  That just does not sound like the New Testament picture of the growth of the church.  Do not get me wrong, I am not one of those people who say be a nice person and hope someone asks you about Jesus.  I think a better way of sharing the Good News is to be evangelicious.  What I mean by that is that we should be soaked in the Good News of Jesus Christ.  It should influence every part of us, what we say and what we do.  Imagine if we were and evangelicious church.  Imagine if we made the Good News of Jesus look so delicious in our lives that people longed for what we have.  We would never have to evangelize another person again.