Evangelism and Apologetics
By Israel Crocker
July 2008
Evangelism is the call of the righteous. God Almighty, in His wisdom, has placed the responsibility of converting souls upon the saints of His kingdom. Unfortunately, many shun this responsibility. An unfailing rationale is the lack of belief in the inspiration of the Scriptures. An age of naturalism and modernism has lead many to believe in evolution, or a theistic version of it, as fact; while the Bible is considered religious folk lore. However, Christians are not to be ignorant of the Devil’s devices (2 Cor. 2:11).
A marvelous instrument for conversion today is apologetics. Apologists have argued for the reliability of God’s word for centuries. Nonetheless, there are differing views if whether the Bible should be defended against those who arrogantly attack it. Some believe that the Bible stands on its own, and to defend it is admission of imperfection.
Apologetics has proven to be valuable as a defense showing the accuracy of the Scriptures, even in the realm of science. The scientific statements found in God’s holy writ predates the scientific community, much to its chagrin. Only an all-knowing God could provide pre-scientific knowledge of the universe in a book completed almost 2,000 years ago. Evangelists can open more hearts by using apologetics, enabling people to throw off the shackles of unbelief and accept Christ as the true Savior.
PAST AND PRESENT APOLOGISTS
The business of apologetics is generally, “The rational defense of the Christian faith, its tenets and practices.”1 The word apology is derived from the Greek apologia, which “means to give a reason or defense.”2 Thus, an apologist is one who stands in defense of the existence of God and the accuracy of Scripture.
Any principle of truth that is exhibited originates from the mind of God; and men who correctly defend the faith do so based on biblical truth and Godly logic. Even those outside of the Lord’s church have argued for truth; although sadly, they will not reap the benefits of salvation (Mark 16:16, Matt. 7:21-27). Nonetheless, noted apologists outside of the Lord’s church have been responsible for manifesting many details that press a clear path in apology. “In the early church, the defenses of Christianity presented to heathen emperors by the Christian writers were called Apologies, and the writers themselves are styled Apologists.”3 Justin Martyr, Origen, and Augustine wrote against heretics of their day; while Anselm and Thomas Aquinas attempted through philosophical argument to prove God’s existence (AD 1000-1300). 4
Battling the attacks of postmodernism and atheism today are Phillip E. Johnson, Dr. Henry M. Morris, Michael Denton, Michael J. Behe, and Norman L. Geisler, just to list a few. These men stand in defense of Creationism, and have formed important science-based groups such as Discovery Institute and Creation Research Society Quarterly.5 Although these men fight a virtuous warfare, salvation and true defense of scripture is only profitable for those within the Lord’s kingdom. Jesus said, “He that is not with Me is against Me; and he that gathereth not with Me scattereth abroad” (Matt. 12:30). To illustrate this sad point, bro. Benjamin Franklin, who was the editor of the American Christian Review, uses this historical example:
There are some old men, too old to belong to the army, at the battle of Bunker’s Hill, in the time of the American Revolution, and fought, as we would say it in our Westernish style, on “their own hook,” taking positions behind trees, logs, stumps, rocks, etc., and did much service. There were also boys, too young to be in the army, who did the same. The historian speaks well of these, and gives them credit for what they did; but they were not enrolled in the army, and received no pay. In the same way, there are some men who skirmish for our King, and do good battle, who have never enlisted, and do not belong to the army, and while we feel kindly toward them, and commend them for the battle they make for our King, we regret that they do not volunteer, join the army and do the complete work of the soldier; so that they, with the other soldiers, may receive the reward.6
It is a shame these men stand for true principles as apologists, but refuse to acknowledge the simple, soul-saving Gospel. In spite of everything, the truth of apologetics has merit, not because of these men, but because of the source of truth—the Almighty God (Deut. 32:4).
DIFFERENCES IN APPROACH
Apologetics is simple in its definition as giving a defense. However, not everyone agrees on how the defense should be given, from what point one should begin, or even if the Bible should be defended by any means. The differing types of apologetics are classified into three avenues: Classical apologetics, Evidential (also considered Historical) apologetics, and Presuppositional apologetics.7 Evidential and Classical apology have many items in common; but in addition to historical evidence, a classical approach will use first principles. These first principles include: laws of logic, existence of morality, existence of self, complexity of nature, and reality itself.8 Those of the evidential argumentation see historical evidences as the major witness to the existence of God.
The basic approach of historical apologetics is to begin with the historicity of the New Testament documents and then to use the miracles of Christ, particularly the resurrection, to demonstrate that Christ is the Son of God (thereby establishing that a theistic God exists who can work miracles.)9
Other steps follow that build upon the focus of history and the resurrection of Jesus, ultimately persuading a person to accept that Jesus is Christ by accurate historical account.
Josephus, a Jewish historian, wrote of Christ’s trial before Pilate and Jesus’ resurrection. He offers unprejudiced comment of our Lord’s impact.
Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles.10
This historian was not a Christian upon his writing about Jesus, and there is no knowledge that would suggest his conversion afterwards. Thus, a powerful historical argument can be made from this contemporary of Christ, who had no religious persuasion.
The historical approach, nonetheless, has its problems. One has to first accept the existence of God before he will believe in the rest of the arguments. The Classical and Presuppositional apologists incriminate this as circular reasoning (i.e., making an argument from a source that has not been proven itself.) Classical apologists argue, “...only a theist understands the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth as a supernatural act of a theistic God and that this demonstrates that Jesus is the unique Son of a theistic God.”11 Although this approach may have its limits for evangelizing skeptics, the historical support for Jesus, His miracles, and resurrection is faith-building for the Christian today.
The Presuppositional approach is fallacious in many ways. This faction assumes the existence of God just as the Evidentialists, but the “...presuppositionalist, on the other hand, insist that one must begin with presuppositions or worldviews.”12 One’s worldview, therefore, will determine how receptive he will be toward the message, no matter how clear an argument may be presented. It also falsely assumes that man is so depraved in his inherited sinful nature that the only way to receive truth is by a direct working of the Holy Spirit. One writer erroneously presumes, “Fallen man needs the gospel and the work of the Spirit of God.”13 He states this in the context of John Calvin who championed total hereditary depravity. The Holy Spirit must, according to Calvinism and presuppositionalists, directly act upon the mind of the unregenerate person, to make possible the reception of the Gospel. If this were true, then all evangelical failure would be blamed on the Spirit of God; but such contradicts scripture. “For there is no respect of persons with God” (Rom. 2:11). God’s concern for the lost is, “Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:4).
Fideism should be mentioned, although it does not coincide with apologetics. It is the opposite of apologetics, and some brethren mistakenly use this “approach” to discuss the Bible. It argues “...matters of faith and religious belief are not supported by reason.”14 One must just simply accept the Bible at the surface, without any question. Geisler continues,
Fideists are skeptical with regard to the nature of evidence as applied to belief. They believe no evidence or argument applies to belief in God. God is not reached by evidence, but only by faith.15
It is true the Bible stands on its own—it requires no defense because it came from a perfect Being (Psalm 19:7); but this serves no purpose for evangelism. Not everyone reasons this way, and God does not expect anybody to do so (Isa. 1:18). “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (Heb. 11:1). True faith comes from Biblical evidence (Rom. 10:17); and the Bible is a book of reason that harmonizes with all truthful principles, whether spiritual or empirical matters. Therefore, it stands with no contradiction of nature, philosophy, or historical fact.
Fideism also suggests to the skeptic that the Bible cannot be defended. God the Spirit says otherwise. “But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defense of the Gospel” (Phil. 1:17). “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” (Jude 3). Giving a defense of Christianity, and proving the Bible as the source of authority is an evangelist’s work. “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” (1 Pet. 3:15).
PRE-SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE
Pre-scientific references within the Bible demonstrate credibility of inspiration from God, and seems to be the simplest way to convince the listener. If one can validate the accuracy and reliability of scripture in all matters, then the listener will be less skeptical of the message. To explain pre-scientific Jackson opines:
The Bible does not purport to be a textbook on science; much less does it engage in scientific speculation. There are, however, numerous examples in Scripture where inspired men simply stated or alluded to certain scientific truths which they could have never have known by natural means. For these scientific truths were not discovered for centuries.16
Renown creationist Henry Morris, according to bro. Jackson, says that pre-scientific knowledge is, “...the great number of scientific truths that have lain hidden within its pages for thirty centuries or more, only to be discovered by man’s enterprise within the last few centuries or even years.”17 Thus, pre-scientific statements are scientific truths found in scripture that predate the knowledge of man’s discovery. God, therefore, is the author of the Bible by these proofs, and not man (2 Pet. 1:20-21).
Here are some examples for Astronomy.18 1) The earth was believed to be flat by most adventurers in Columbus’ day (1400-1500s). The Bible states contrarily: “It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in” (Isa. 40:22). 2) The earth is suspended in space; “He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing” (Job 26:7). 3) Stars function according to celestial laws:
Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion? Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? Or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons? Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth? (Job 38:31-33)
Here is the Bible’s allusion of Oceanography:19 1) The mountains that comprise the ocean’s bottom are told by the prophet while captivated in the great fish, “The waters compassed me about, even to the soul: the depth closed me round about, the weeds were wrapped about my head. I went down to the bottoms of the mountains; the earth with her bars was about me for ever: yet hast thou brought up my life from corruption, O LORD my God” (Jonah 2:5-6). 2) The currents of the sea are revealed, “The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas” (Psa. 8:8).
Inspiration also provided pre-scientific knowledge of Medicine. “For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul” (Lev. 17:11).
But we didn’t know that in George Washington’s day. How did the “father of our country” die? We bled him to death. People felt that the blood was where evil “vapors” were found, and that getting rid of that blood would make a person well again.20
The field of Physics is specified too. When the earth was created God ceased His creative work. “Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them” (Gen. 2:1). The First Law of Thermodynamics states that, “...neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed.”21 Therefore, when God rested from creation, He did not do so because He was exhausted; the statement means the creation process completely halted. This is harmonious with true science before man discovered this principle.
Other fields of scientific study are disclosed in scripture; Biology (Gen. 1:11, Acts 17:25), Meteorology (Eccl. 1:7, Job 36:27-28), Psychology (2 Sam. 17:23), and indisputably, Archeology. These examples can be reiterated to make evident the Bible did not originate from the mind of humanity. If so, these scientific statements would have propelled these writers to academic supremacy—above all scientists of Biblical times.
PRE-EVANGELISM
Apologetics has an increasingly important role. Also noted as “pre-evangelism,” Christian apologetics can be used to prepare the heart for reception of the Gospel. Making argument from science and logic does not save one’s soul from spiritual death, only Jesus’ blood will suffice (Matt 26:28); but using sound reasoning will substantiate that Christianity makes sense to the rational mind. And why not? It comes from a rational God.
There are those who make apology outside of the Lord’s church, and throughout history debates have circulated over this eternal matter. Appreciative as one can be for those who fight this righteous battle, it can only be won by the Lord and His army.
Evangelism, on the home front, seems to have been all but abandoned. Not because of the ineffectiveness of the Gospel. Its power will always surpass any gimmick that man will spawn (1 Cor. 1:18-21); evangelism in America has been neglected because members of the church have not understood their God-given obligation (Matt. 28:19-20). Unlike Fideists, who refuse reasoning, the apologist must skillfully defend the truth against those who arrogantly attack Christianity. The Bible is not a science book, but it is a book containing its principles; and when people discover that it is accurate on all fronts, they can remove their prejudice. Excuses will not suffice on the day of Judgment. We have the arsenal as Christians to win the fight against all attacks against holy Scripture.
END NOTES:
1. Justo L. Gonzalez, Essential Theological Terms (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005), 13.
2. Norman L. Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999), 37.
3. John McClintock and James Strong, “apology,” in Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, eds. John McClintock and James Strong (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1981), 1:301-302.
4. Gonzalez, 13-14.
5. Eugenie C. Scott, “Creation Science Lite: ‘Intelligent Design’ as the New Anti-Evolutionism,” in Scientists Confront Creationism, eds. Andrew J. Petto and Laurie R. Godfrey (New York, NY: W. W. Norton and Company, 2007), 60-64.
6. Benjamin Franklin, The Gospel Preacher, vol. II (Delight, AR: Gospel Light Publishing Company, n.d.), 363-364.
7. H. Wayne House, “A Biblical Argument for Balanced Apologetics: How the Apostle Paul Practiced Apologetics in the Acts,” in Reasons for Faith, eds. Norman L. Geisler and Chad V. Meister (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2007), 55.
8. Ibid. 9. Geisler, 319.
10. Flavius Josephus, The Works of Josephus (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1987), 480.
11. Geisler, 320. 12. Ibid., 607. 13. House, 58. 14. Geisler, 246. 15. Ibid.
16. Wayne Jackson, Fortify Your Faith (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press, Inc., 1974), 63. 17. Ibid. 18. Ibid. 19. Ibid.
20. Bert Thompson, Rock-Solid Faith (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press, Inc., 2000), 235.
21. Ibid., 233.