Apologetics is the discipline that deals with a rational defense of Christian faith. It comes from the Greek word apologia which means ‘to give a reason or defense’. [We are not ‘apologizing’ for our beliefs.]
Studying ‘apologetics’ will help us to always to be ready with a reason for what we believe.
1 Peter 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: 16 Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ.
‘Apologetics’ is centerred around reasoning out of the scriptures.
Acts 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, 3 Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ.
In order to be capable in the field of ‘apologetics’, one needs to be taught the faithful word well; he needs to be sound on his doctrine; he needs to hold to it fast.
Titus 1:9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.
We need to be so well-studied in the field of ‘apologetics’ that publickly we can mightily convince the skeptics out there.
Acts 18:28 For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publickly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ.
Practicing ‘apologetics’ involves contending for the faith.
Jude 3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
The ‘apologetics’ of our faith is worth fighting for…it is what we fight ‘with’.
1 Tim 6:12 Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.
Apologetics’ doesn’t necessarily involve arguing with gainsayers. One should strive to be gentle, patient, meek; use your best aptitude in teaching. The goal is to help them get out of their bondage to the Devil. The goal is NOT to win the argument….
2 Tim 2:24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, 25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
(The section below is taken from the Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, by Norman L. Geisler)
There are differing kinds of apologetics systems, and no universally-acknowledged way to categorize them. Divergent approaches seem to be determined by the perspective of the one categorizing them. Nonetheless, there are some generally understood terms one can employ to view in a meaningful way the distinctives among more popular approaches.
There are 5 major types of Christian Apologetics: Classical, Evidential, Experiential, Historical, and Presuppositional.
Classical Apologetics – Classical apologetics stresses arguments for the existence of God as well as the historical evidence supporting the truth of Christianity. Classical apologetics is characterized by two basic steps: theistic and evidential arguments. Theistic arguments are used to establish the truth of theism apart from an appeal to special revelation (e.g., the Bible).
The first step in classical apologetics involves drawing the logical inference that if a theistic God exists, miracles are possible; indeed, the greatest miracle of all, creation, is possible. The credibility of miracles is essential to the next step in classical apologetics—the historical one—but it flows logically from the first step.
Second, confirmed historical evidence substantiates the truth. The New Testament documents are shown to be historically reliable. The apologist also shows that these documents reveal that Jesus claimed to be, and was miraculously proven to be, the Son of God.
Evidential Apologetics – Evidential apologetics stresses the need for evidence in support of the Christian truth claims. The evidence can be rational, historical, archaeological, and even experiential. Since it is so broad, it understandably overlaps with other types of apologetics. [A major difference between Evidentialists and Classicalists is that the former does not put as much importance on starting off with proving (attempting to) the existence of God, and then following a logical projection thereafter.]
Evidentialists operate as attorneys who combine evidences into an overall brief in defense of their position, trusting that the combined weight will present a persuasive case.
Many evidentialists focus on archeological evidence in support of the Bible. They stress that both the Old and the New Testaments have been substantiated by thousands of discoveries. This, they believe, gives reason to accept the divine authority of the Scriptures.
Some evidentialists appeal to experiential evidence in support of Christianity, most often from changed lives. The testimony of those converted to Christianity is offered as evidence of the truth of Christianity.
Prophetic evidence is often offered to substantiate Christianity. It is argued that only divine origin accounts for the numerous, precise biblical predictions that have been fulfilled. For the evidentialists prophetic and other evidences do not comprise a specific step in an overall logical order (as it is in classical apologetics). Rather, it is the sum total of all the interlocking evidences that offer high probability of the truth of Christianity.
The most widely distributed of evidentialist books is Josh McDowell’s Evidence That Demands a Verdict.
Experiential Apologetics – Some Christians appeal primarily, if not exclusively, to experience as evidence for Christian faith. Some appeal to religious experience in general. Others to special religious experiences. Within this second category are some who focus on mystical experiences and others who identify what they believe are particularly supernatural conversion experiences. There are obviously some significant differences under the broad experiential umbrella.
The value of general, unspecific religious experience is of limited value for a distinctly Christian apologetic. At best, general experience establishes credibility for belief in a supreme being of some kind (not necessarily a theistic God).
Those who appeal to such experiences reject apologetic approaches in the traditional sense. They spurn rational arguments or factual evidence in favor of what they believe to be a self-verifying experience.
Experiential arguments for God’s existence are sometimes used by classical apologists and evidentialists. The difference is that, for the experiential apologist, the only kind of evidence is non-rational, mystical, and existential. In other apologetic approaches, the argument from religious experience is just one kind of evidence among many.
Many other apologists, especially of the rational variety, reject purely experiential arguments as unverifiable and of subjective interpretation.
Historical Apologetics. Historical Apologetics apologetics stresses historical evidence as the basis for demonstrating the truth of Christianity. These apologists believe that the truth of Christianity, including the existence of God, can be proven from the historical evidence alone. In one sense historical apologetics belongs to the broad class of evidential apologetics, but it differs in that it stresses the importance, if not necessity, of beginning with the historical record for the truth of Christianity.
The historical apologist only begins with historical evidence as a basic premise. With historicity established, the apologist argues that certain claims are made in Scripture from which it can be inferred that God exists, the Bible is the Word of God, and Christ is the unique Son of God.
Both historical and classical apologetics use historical evidence. But the classical apologist believes that historical evidence is only a second step, logically preceded by theistic arguments which establish the necessary worldview evidence by which alone one can properly interpret the historical evidence.
Presuppositional Apologetics – A presuppositionalist presupposes the basic truth of Christianity and then proceeds to show (in any of several ways) that Christianity alone is true.
According to revelational presuppositionalism, one must posit that the Triune God has revealed himself in Holy Scriptures before it is possible to make any sense out of the universe, life, language, or history. This is sometimes viewed as a transcendental argument.
The rational presuppositionalist also begins with the Trinity revealed in the written Word of God. But the test for whether this is true or not is simply the law of noncontradiction. Christianity demonstrates its own truth in that, of all religions, it alone is internally consistent.
Francis Schaeffer’s apologetic approach has occasionally been listed as a separate form of presuppositionalism, a kind of practical presuppositionalism. Schaeffer believes that false systems are unlivable, that only Christian truth is livable.
(from Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, by Norman L. Geisler)