There has been a recent backlash against apologetics.
Vocal criticism of apologetics has come from some surprising quarters. The 2014 Christianity Today Book Award winner was Myron Penner’s The End of Apologetics, published by Baker Books in America. Penner singles out William Lane Craig for criticism as an example of what is wrong in contemporary apologetics and evangelism.
Two sides of the same coin?
According to Penner, Craig represents the very attitude to reason and rationalism that we should resist, ‘Despite what Christian apologists may tell themselves and others about how much they oppose modern philosophical assumptions or the dominant views of modernity, they nevertheless are in fundamental agreement with modern thinkers about which questions are the important ones, how those questions need to be answered, and why they need answering.’ (p.46) In other words, William Lane Craig has fallen for the same arrogant style of argument that Richard Dawkins uses. They are simply two sides of the same coin.
Penner argues that Christians should put a halt to this style of apologetics, which has come to dominate evangelism. Instead of trying to make the case that our beliefs are objectively true, we should focus on showing that they are subjectively attractive. He testifies, ‘the reason I am a Christian is that I am edified or built up by it.’ (p.75) Rather than relying on logical arguments or archaeological discoveries we should offer the story of the gospel as the most attractive story going. Our listeners will be converted if they are edified or encouraged. An argumentative exchange is more likely to put them off.
Emerging church
Penner’s claim is not dissimilar to that of Brian McLaren who, as a pastor in the Emerging Church movement, has also called for a shift of attitude among Christians. In his book, A New Kind of Christian, he tells the story of a young believer called Neo, who says, ‘… when it comes to other religions, the challenge in modernity was to prove that we’re right and they’re wrong. But I think we have to have a different challenge in post-modernity … If we put the effort into being good that we put into being right … somehow I think that more people would believe we are right…’ (pp.60-61). McLaren presents us with a choice. Out of touch Christians prefer argumentative apologetics. Those who are more with it will choose attractive good works.
Misleading
These criticisms are misleading. It is certainly true that some apologists are abrasive and aggressive. It is also true that if winning an argument means losing a soul then the price is not worth paying. It may also be true that some contemporary apologetics is shaped by formal styles of debate that are unhelpful for most conversations. Christian witness is not political campaigning. Evangelism is not making a sales pitch. The New Testament encourages debate and giving reasons, but cautions us to always do so ‘with gentleness and respect’ (1 Peter 3:15). However, these critics of apologetics offer a false dilemma. They suggest the choice is between argument and edification, or being good and being right. But we do not have to choose. We should seek both. A Christian should want to debate unbelief and hold to true beliefs. A Christian should want to share the truth in words and live the truth in deeds. There are some bad examples of apologetics, and there are abrasive Christians, but that should not put us off wanting to understand our faith better and engage with the objections our friends may raise.
