Apologetics as a Posture, not an Argument

This article is part of a monthlong series about the role of apologetics in youth ministry. You can read YPT’s other articles about apologetics here.

Apologetics is a confusing topic of discussion. It has become one of those catch-all terms that you either love (because you are interested in the subject) or hate (because it immediately brings to mind someone you don’t like).

Some people claim apologetics is its own field of study, where you primarily piece together arguments from natural theology. Others see it as an approach to evangelism. Some find it as a waste of time that relies too heavily on reason, while others claim Jesus and the Apostles are examples of “doing apologetics.” You may have noticed, this still has not helped us define what apologetics is.

So if it is so hard to define, and it causes so many disagreements, why spend time discussing it? Because I believe that apologetics, rightly construed, is an essential part of the Christian faith. If that statement seems too bold to you, I will double-down: faithful Christian witnesses must be engaged in apologetics, because without it your Christian witness will suffer greatly.

Towards a Robust Definition of Apologetics

For the purpose of this article, I will define apologetics as “the study of how to clearly define, defend, and deliver the Christian faith.” You may have noticed that this definition is much more broad and all-encompassing than others you may have heard, and that is on purpose. The reason is to highlight an important truth: apologetics is not merely a field of study, a method of sharing your faith, or a rational argument; it is a posture. It is a way of practicing theology and logic in the pursuit of reaching unbelievers with the gospel, which means that the goal of apologetics is to rightly represent the Word of God so that people come to know Him and grow in Him. It is not disconnected from theology, philosophy, or evangelism; it utilizes them all.

This makes the necessary posture of the faithful apologist one of humility, integrity, and responsibility. Apologetics contends for the Christian faith in positive, negative, and reactive situations, hoping to help move the listener closer to faith in Christ. If this is not being done, then I propose that an apologetic encounter is not taking place. To flush this idea out, I want to give three biblical examples of apologetics being done well in each of these three contexts, all from, in my opinion, the greatest apologist: Paul.

A Positive Encounter (Acts 17:16-34)

Positive apologetic encounters are those where the audience is generally receptive to the Christian faith, but they may not have a solid understanding of what Christianity teaches. This could be an evangelistic conversation, or it could be a presentation to a large crowd. The basic idea is that you are primarily making a positive case for why the Christian faith should be embraced to an audience that is, more than likely, open to listen.

In this encounter at Mars Hill, Paul is stepping into a religiously pluralistic and highly intellectual crowd who is working without a Christian framework. He sees that although they are open to religious ideas, they have never heard the truth of the gospel. Paul is moved to make a positive case for the faith, to propose that the truth of Christianity was the “good” they had been looking for in all their other religions, and He did so by using a mixture of reason, comparative religious discussion, and their own writings to present the truth of who God is and how they can know Him. As a result of his efforts, several believe and desire to know more about Christ.

A Negative Encounter (1 Corinthians 15)

Negative apologetic encounters are those where the audience has confused or misunderstood some Christian teachings, leading them into heretical views that could keep them from saving faith in Christ. In this case, the primary role of the apologist is to correct these flawed views in the hopes that the listeners will return to orthodoxy and move forward in their faith.

In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul responds to some serious heretical ideas surrounding Jesus’s death and resurrection. There were those seeking to discount the physical resurrection of Christ, either holding to a spiritual resurrection or no resurrection at all. Paul combats those ideas by clearly articulating the implications of such a view to show the danger of their logic: if Christ has not been raised, God is a liar, they have no hope, they are still trapped under sin, and Christianity is pointless. What Paul does is an excellent example of a negative apologetic encounter: combating serious flaws, countering with the truth, and presenting it all within a context of hope in the gospel.

A Reactive Encounter (2 Corinthians 10-12)

Reactive encounters are those where the nature of the interaction is more combative or hostile. In these instances, you are not merely providing clarity in a discussion of doctrine, but your audience wants to discredit the faith through attacking the beliefs themselves or by seeking to attack the Christian sharing their faith. These encounters are not ideal and can take their toll on the Christian, but they are inevitable for those who are intentional about contending for the faith regularly.

In 2 Corinthians chapters 10-12, Paul has a unique task: defending himself to defend the faith. There are those who had come into the church at Corinth (called “super-apostles”) were attempting to discredit Paul’s message by discrediting Paul the man. They argued that He was weak, frail, too small and humble, lacking the grandeur and charisma that a leader should have. They tried to lead the church away from the gospel Paul preached because Paul did not meet their criteria for a successful leader. Paul responds by boasting. He doesn’t boast in himself, but in what Christ has sustained Him through, what He has revealed through Paul’s weakness, and how it all has served to bring God glory and make Paul more like Christ. In doing so, He is once again contending for the faith, albeit in a reactive way, addressing their concerns and tying it back to the gospel.

We Should ALL Be Apologists

Treat the gospel like a buried chest containing treasure: how does someone find it? They need the map to the location, to believe the treasure actually exists, and to clear the dirt away once they get there. I believe this embodies the role of apologetics: to point people in the right direction of the gospel, while also clearing away any lingering debris that might prevent them from seeing the treasure clearly.

We must define what the gospel is, making a positive case for its goodness. We must defend what the gospel is, combating negative mischaracterizations and providing clarity as needed. We also must deliver the gospel boldly, responding to those hostile to its truth by addressing their concerns and continually returning them to the Savior they must confront, trusting in God’s power to change hearts.

At the end of the day, apologetics is not an argument, an evangelism strategy, or a theological camp. It is a posture that seeks to, as Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 9:22, “become all things to all people, that by ANY means, I might save some.” As a Christian, that is our calling. We are all apologists. May we seek to be effective witnesses of the power of God to change lives, and may our apologetic posture reflect that.