Biblical Apologetics
Title of Essay
Analyse the Effectiveness within Scripture of the following approaches to Apologetics: General Revelation, Historical Record & Eyewitness Testimony, Fulfilment of Prophecy and The Witness of Our Lives.
To what extent are these approaches still valid for the apologetic task today?
Commentary:
I really don’t like this subject. I am not a fan of a structured approach to the Apologetic Task and analysing how people persuade others. I was also under the pump with work. I can supply reasons but no excuses. I didn’t put the effort in and therefore didn’t get the desired outcome.
Ultimately, the result was a high pass mark: 64%.
Abstract
There are many different styles of apologetics indicative of the many different audiences of the apologetics message. It is very difficult to analyse the effectiveness of an approach within Scripture, nevertheless, the mere fact that the apostles continued to use these approaches, is indicative of their effectiveness. Clearly, any apologetics approach adopted in isolation runs the risk of either being effectively countered in its entirety or leading to deism without the all-important characteristic of the Christian Deity. General Revelation is the argument to nature, physical and human as well as history as an apologist. It is used throughout the Scripture to draw attention to the Creator. It is valid as the first step in a classical apologist approach but needs to be combined with other approaches to be an effective apologist for Christian faith. Historicity of and eyewitness accounts for the biblical record, particularly for the life, death and resurrection of Jesus are both valid and very effective apologetics approaches particularly for audiences who claim a evidence based approach to living. In the New Testament, it was used by great effect by Paul in writing to the Corinthians and asserting eyewitness testimony for the Risen Christ. Fulfilled prophecy can be a trap for inexperienced apologists who may not understand the prophecies in their own right and needs to be carefully approached. Clearly it was widely used by the writers of the New Testament as evidence for the Messiah. The approach is valid today if combined with other approaches but should not be used in isolation as a proof of God, but more as a second step in classical apologetics. The witness of the Christian life was used to great effect by the Christians of the New Testament. It is valid today at least in starting the apologetics conversation. All approaches can be used but with a mind to the audience of the apologetics message.
Introduction
Alistair McGrath identifies five apologetic types as “resources” or approaches for the apologist to call on in the apologetics task[1] that work in tandem with the approaches employed in biblical times by the canonical writers. Apologists match a combination of approaches to an audience. Douglas Groothuis[2] states that “Christian apologetics is the rational defence of the Christian worldview as objectively true, rationally compelling, and existentially or subjectively engaging.” He makes the case for apologetics in a post-modernist, post enlightenment world. Josh and Sean McDowell[3] also use a rationalist and evidential apologetic approach. Norman Geisler[4] advocates a methodical, rational and evidential apologetic approach. Many apologists today rely heavily on evidential and rational apologetics. Additionally, rationalists such as Francis Shaeffer and Tim Keller rely more heavily on the dialogue of Presuppositional Apologetics[5]. It is important to note that these varied approaches are highly audience responsive which is important in considering apologetics as it relates to apologetics in the bible.
Apologetics dates to the creation account which was narrated as a defence against other ANE creation accounts[6]. The apostle Peter in his epistle (1 Pet 3:15[7]) makes the case for always being prepared to engage in the task of apologetics (“to make a defence[8]”). In 2 Corinthians 5:11, Paul writes of persuading others: “Therefore, knowing the fear of the Lord, we persuade others.”[9] Everyone faces judgement and therefore, Christians should persuade others of the faith. (2 Cor 5:10-11). Joshua Chatraw and Mark Allen[10] identify six approaches to the apologetic task in the bible. Four approaches are general revelation, the historical record and eyewitness testimony, the fulfilment of prophecy and the witness of Christian life. The effectiveness of each method can only be judged by the repeated use of the method by the apologists in Scripture.
Whilst a Christian, using an approach, plants the seed and another waters it, God ultimately converts (1 Cor 3:6-8). Apologetics prepares the ground for a non-believer, clearing away their objections and answering their questions, so that they are ready to trust Christ.[11] How did this occur in Scripture?
Four Approaches in Scripture
General Revelation
Blaise Pascal[12] argues that “Men despise religion. They hate it and are afraid it may be true. The cure for this is first to show that religion is not contrary to reason.” A defence for God is general revelation. The Psalmist (19:1-6) claims that “the heavens declare the glory of God and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.”. General revelation demonstrates the existence of God through nature (e.g. Acts 14:15-17), humanity (e.g. Acts 17:26-29) and history (e.g. Dan 4:17) as opposed to through Scripture[13]. Scholars[14] assert the Psalmist’s declaration is the heavens acting as an extra-Biblical apologist for God. It is at the core of general revelation as apologetics. It asserts that evidence for the existence of God can be observed through the physical environment, human behaviour and the history of the human race and in God’s care for the world including humanity.[15]
Paul uses general revelation in Lystra (Acts 14:8-18), again in addressing the Athenians in the Areopagus (Acts 17:22-34) and later in writing to the Romans (Rom 1:18-20). Chatraw and Allen[16] link Paul’s affirmations with those of the Psalmist. Daniel (ch 2 and 7) makes the case for God through human history in the context of prophecy. “There is a God in heaven who reveals mysteries…” (Dan 2:28) relating to Nebuchadnezzar’s dream argues for the presence of God in history. Daniel (4:17) picks up this theme of God’s involvement in history. Both Paul’s defence in Lystra and in the Areopagus contain an appeal to God’s providential care (eg “he has shown kindness by giving you rain for heaven and crops in their seasons….”).
General revelation is foundational in Christian Apologetics.[17] As a presuppositional approach, unbelievers consider their own framework for interpreting creation and nature comparing their basis for them.[18] The teleological argument for God’s existence relies on a Designer for nature or for a “First Cause” in the cosmological argument or for a Moral Law Giver in a moral argument for God.[19]
General revelation can be countered by arguments to science together with arguments around human suffering. To be effective, it must interact with the special revelation of Scripture.[20] Alistair McGrath points out the compatibility of science and religion because general revelation in the natural world requires interpretation just as Scripture requires interpretation.[21] General revelation is valid today, understanding that it may evidence a deity (deism) but not necessarily the Christian deity. To be effective it needs to be coupled with one or more of the following approaches.
Historical Record & Eyewitness Accounts
The biblical qualification for the twelve disciples (and for Paul) was eyewitness testimony verifying the historicity of Jesus (Luke 1:1-4; Acts 1:21-22; 1 Cor 15:3-8; Gal 1:1, 11-13, 15-20).[22] The disciples had to speak with authority. Apologetics around the resurrection of Jesus is strengthened by Paul’s assertion of eyewitness testimony of his resurrection in 1 Corinthians (15:5-8)[23]. John (1 Jn 1:1) asserts both historicity and eyewitness testimony effectively to lend authority and as a defence of the accuracy of his testimony[24]. Christianity alone among religions is based on the resurrection of its divine founder.[25] Paul’s claim to the historicity of the resurrection is fundamental to Christianity[26]. William Lane Craig asserts that without it, the disciples would have remained crushed and defeated.[27] Establishing the early church relied exclusively on the historicity and eyewitness claims of a risen Lord. As a method of apologetics, the fact of the growth of the early church and its persistence is testimony to the effectiveness of the approach.
Given the centrality of the claims regarding Christ’s resurrection, an argument to the historical record and eyewitness testimony is a very valid and effective apologetic approach today.[28]
Fulfilled Prophecy
The prophet Isaiah calls on Israel to “reason together” (Isa 1:18) in a rational defence for his claims.[29] The principal prophecy that apologists in the New Testament use is the way in which Jesus fulfilled the messianic prophecies. Isaiah 9 (v6) declares the incarnate Deity and in Chapter 40 makes a promise of comfort in Jesus and of course Isa 53 is a direct depiction of the work of the Lord.[30] The entire sacrificial system of the Hebrew Bible foreshadows Jesus and is picked up in prophecies of the suffering servant (Isa 53).[31]
The argument for the inspired word of God from fulfilled prophecy is an argument from omniscience.[32] Fulfilled prophecy does not prove the existence of God but demonstrates God’s involvement in history.[33] In Classical Apologetics, care should be taken to use fulfilled prophecy to point to a Christian God after one has established the existence of Deity. Prophecy in relation to Messiah establishes that God is true and reliable (Num 23:19), that he accomplishes all he says (Isa 46:9-10) and that God announced Messiah (Isa 48:3, 5; Rom 1:2-4).[34] Chatraw and Allen assert that fulfilled prophecy in apologetics must be done with wisdom, care and insight.[35]
Thomas Aquinas observes “we believe the prophets and apostles because the Lord had been their witness by performing miracles… and we believe the successors of the apostles and prophets only in so far as they tell us those things which the apostles and prophets have left in their writings.”[36]
Biblical prophecy is often clear and unequivocal (e.g. Dan 9:24; Micah 5:2; Isa 53) and if used carefully, is entirely valid. Other extra-Biblical prophecies do not have the same specific, repeated and unfailing fulfilment, highlighting the validity of comparing Biblical prophecy against Nostradamus for example. Objections to the apologetic approach of fulfilled prophecy can countered, however, effectiveness is reliant on the historical evidence of the matters being prophesied.[37] To a Jewish audience in the first century, linking their own prophecies to Jesus Christ must have been extremely effective. Today, fulfilled prophecy is an effective and valid tool, used carefully and with understanding of the prophecies themselves.[38]
The Witness of the Christian Life
Jesus in John 14:6 uses his life as an example: “I am the way, the truth and the life…”. In a sense, he is inviting scrutiny of his life as an apologetic method. The writer of the Hebrews points to the example of Christ’ life to give us confidence to “draw near” (10:22). 2 Corinthians (3:2) refers to Christians as “letters of recommendation”, speaking of their lives as an apologetic to those around them. The transformative nature of the Gospel for the believer was and is a powerful apologetic. Clearly, Paul’s conversion experience was key to his own apologetic task (Acts 22, 26). Note Paul to King Agrippa, “I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision but declared … that they should repent and turn to God…” (26:19-20). Douglas Groothuis[39] affirms that “these accounts [of a changed life] form[ed] a vital part of the confirmation of the Christian message. The witness of a transformed life may very significantly affect those close to the one transformed.”
As an apologetic, the way that Christians interacted with one another in love (Jn 13:14-15, 34-35) made much more plausible the existence of God who sacrificed Jesus for the world he loves[40]. The witness of the Christian’s life is still today effective as a part of the apologist’s toolbox[41]. Good citizenship as apologetics must be supported by sound teaching.[42]
Conclusion
Douglas Groothuis relates an article where Nicholas Kristoff in the New York Times refers to Karen Armstong’s more spiritually creative and non-literal way of reading and interpreting Scripture around the role of women.[43] This illustrates the essential debate between reading the bible as a historical record and eyewitness account versus the allegory and myth many, such as Kristoff, attempt to assert. Groothuis posits that Kristoff’s complaint is an important lesson to Apologists about hermeneutics and what apologists ought to defend.[44] Appropriate exegesis around the objections of Kristoff removes the debate. In isolation, the objections of a Kristoff can be very confronting. Employing the whole toolkit of the biblical apologists greatly assists in the task.
Whilst some biblical apologetics approaches appear to be more effective than others, a combination of approaches is more effective and valid than one approach in isolation. For example, the witness of the Christian life significantly enhances any apologetic message. Defending a faith that is not life transforming seems entirely counter-intuitive. As Josh Chatraw and Mark Allen[45] opine, “when Christians sacrifice for one another… they make more plausible the… truth that the Father sent the Son…”.
All of the approaches were effective when used in the Bible, otherwise, they would not have been used and recorded. As effective as they were and are today, they are only a part of a dynamic and thoughtful approach to the task of removing the barriers of objection. Tailoring an approach to the audience is still vital today for these methods to have validity.
Bibliography
Chatraw, Joshua D., and Mark D Allen. Apologetics at the Cross: An Introduction for Christian Witnesses. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2018.
Craig, William Lane. Assessing the New Testament Evidence for the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus. Lewiston NY USA: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1989.
Geisler, Norman L. Christian Apologetics. Grand Rapids, UNITED STATES: Baker Academic, 2013. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/dtl/detail.action?docID=4447351.
———. The Big Book of Christian Apologetics: An A to Z Guide. Grand Rapids, UNITED STATES: Baker Books, 2012. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/dtl/detail.action?docID=4448383.
Groothuis, Douglas. Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith. Westmont, UNITED STATES: InterVarsity Press, 2011. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/dtl/detail.action?docID=6829199.
Hill, Andrew E., and John H. Walton. A Survey of the Old Testament. 3rd Edition. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2009.
McDowell, Josh, and Sean McDowell. Evidence That Demands a Verdict: Life-Changing Truth for a Sceptical World. Milton Keynes, UK: Authentic Media Ltd., 2017.
McGrath, Alister E. Christian Apologetics: An Introduction. Hoboken NJ USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2024.
Vine, W. E. An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words. Nashville, Tn: Royal Publishers, Inc., 1952.
Whybray, R. N. Isaiah 40-66: Based on the Revised Standard Version. New Century Bible. Mich. U.S: Eerdmans, 1981.
[1] Alister E. McGrath, Christian Apologetics: An Introduction (Hoboken NJ USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2024), 4.
[2] Douglas Groothuis, Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith (Westmont, UNITED STATES: InterVarsity Press, 2011), 23, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/dtl/detail.action?docID=6829199.
[3] Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict: Life-Changing Truth for a Sceptical World (Milton Keynes, UK: Authentic Media Ltd., 2017).
[4] Norman L. Geisler, Christian Apologetics (Grand Rapids, UNITED STATES: Baker Academic, 2013), http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/dtl/detail.action?docID=4447351.
[5] McGrath, Christian Apologetics, 134, 182.
[6] Andrew E. Hill and John H. Walton, A Survey of the Old Testament, 3rd Edition. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2009), 83–84.
[7] Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are from The ESV Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version) copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
[8] ἀπολογία Apologia “a speech in defence” W. E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Nashville, Tn: Royal Publishers, Inc., 1952), 53.
[9] Joshua D. Chatraw and Mark D Allen, Apologetics at the Cross: An Introduction for Christian Witnesses (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2018), 28.
[10] Chatraw and Allen, Apologetics at the Cross, 30–43.
[11] McDowell and McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, xxxv.
[12] Quoted in Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, 24.
[13] Norman L. Geisler, The Big Book of Christian Apologetics: An A to Z Guide (Grand Rapids, UNITED STATES: Baker Books, 2012), 809, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/dtl/detail.action?docID=4448383.
[14] Geisler, The Big Book of Christian Apologetics, 809; Chatraw and Allen, Apologetics at the Cross, 30.
[15] Chatraw and Allen, Apologetics at the Cross, 32.
[16] Chatraw and Allen, Apologetics at the Cross, 31.
[17] Geisler, The Big Book of Christian Apologetics, 813.
[18] Chatraw and Allen, Apologetics at the Cross, 32.
[19] Geisler, The Big Book of Christian Apologetics, 813.
[20] Geisler, The Big Book of Christian Apologetics, 813; Chatraw and Allen, Apologetics at the Cross, 33.
[21] McGrath, Christian Apologetics, 162.
[22] Chatraw and Allen, Apologetics at the Cross, 39; Geisler, Christian Apologetics, 376.
[23] McDowell and McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 272.
[24] Chatraw and Allen, Apologetics at the Cross, 40.
[25] McDowell and McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 237; Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, 656.
[26] McDowell and McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 272.
[27] William Lane Craig, Assessing the New Testament Evidence for the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus (Lewiston NY USA: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1989), 407; McDowell and McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 237.
[28] Craig, Assessing the New Testament Evidence for the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus; McDowell and McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 41–91; Geisler, Christian Apologetics, 292–319; Geisler, The Big Book of Christian Apologetics, 11–14.
[29] Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, 35.
[30] Geisler, Christian Apologetics, 322.
[31] Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, 580–81.
[32] Geisler, The Big Book of Christian Apologetics, 728.
[33] Geisler, The Big Book of Christian Apologetics, 728; McDowell and McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 206.
[34] McDowell and McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 206.
[35] Chatraw and Allen, Apologetics at the Cross, 41.
[36] Quoted in Geisler, Christian Apologetics, 384.
[37] Geisler, The Big Book of Christian Apologetics, 737–41.
[38] Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, 503; Chatraw and Allen, Apologetics at the Cross, 41.
[39] Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, 435.
[40] Chatraw and Allen, Apologetics at the Cross, 42.
[41] Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, 435.
[42] Chatraw and Allen, Apologetics at the Cross, 43.
[43] Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, 26.
[44] Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, 27.
[45] Chatraw and Allen, Apologetics at the Cross, 42.
