Recently, Willow Creek Church offered a public lament that today’s generation of Evangelical Christians has ignored apologetics (the intellectual and moral defense of Christianity).

This was music to my ears, as I (and other apologists) have been concerned about a Post-Modern trend for years. Ravi Zarharias put it best, quite some time ago. He said, “We have not taught our people how to defend this!”

By this, he meant the Gospel. To say that the Gospel is frequently attacked in every direction by today’s culture, from our schools, to our media, to the blogosphere, is the understatement of the century. An apologist is merely one who defends the Gospel.

Although this has been a problem for years with the church at large, one arena, which used to include apologetics as a vital part of its work, was the campus ministry. Unfortunately, much has changed. I saw it coming back in the mid-nineties when I attended a campus ministry conference in Atlanta, Georgia. In one of the seminars, the instructor said that apologetics were irrelevant today because we were reaching out to a Post-Modern world. By that, he meant that moral relativism was making it difficult to talk about values without sounding dogmatic and old fashioned. He also meant that rational, linear thoughts were looked down upon and people were more concerned with emotion. The best way to share the gospel was through personal stories about our experiences with God. Having graduated San Jose State as a Drama Major, and being one who performs one-man plays all over the country, I certainly see the value of stories. Even when I teach, I load the lecture with stories because the academic style can often be boring. And so, I have no disagreement with any challenge about the mode of the message.  As for our own testimony being more important than a long discussion about Bible manuscripts, again, I totally agree. Any other apologist would also agree. Contrary to popular opinion, apologists are not people who think we can “argue” souls into the Kingdom. We are very aware that unless the Holy Spirit does a work in somebody’s heart, nothing we say will make any difference.  As one who does all kinds of evangelism, I have always taught that apologetics are a small part of the pie. My very first Evangelism Training Class asks the students to write out and memorize their own testimony. By testimony, I do not mean how one got saved, although that can certainly be included. Primarily, a testimony is a description of what God is doing in our lives NOW, TODAY, to remind us that He is real.

Apologists are specialists. They understand that their work is only one of many key ministries. The purpose of this article is not to argue that apologetics is more important than anything else. Instead, I am responding to the assertion that apologetics have become irrelevant.

Never has Christianity been hated, ridiculed, dissected and “disproved” in the college classroom more than today. Apologetics are merely the other side of the story. With all due respect, such a response has never been more relevant.

When a seeking undergrad wants to get close to God, the worst thing he can do is take a Religious Studies class. In a typical Religious Studies class, the professor says on orientation day, “In this class we will not critique religions. We will merely study what they teach and allow them to speak for themselves.”

What he means is that he is not going to critique any religion but Christianity.

The professor continues. “In this class we are going to learn to respect all religions.”

What he means, is that you are going to learn to respect all religions except Christianity. On the day you study Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism, or even some religion about aliens being hatched from space pods, you will learn about how beautiful the religion is.  On the day you study Christianity, you will learn that the Bible is a chauvinistic book and a racist book. It promotes genocide and slavery. The Bible is also full of contradictions.  Oh yes, and the Bible has been rewritten and mistranslated. If any Christian dares to argue with the professor and defend the Gospel, he’ll hear, “Whoa…Buddy. Back off…Separation between church and state. You’re not allowed to preach in here.”

Funny how this separation never cuts both ways. People can say any vile thing they want about Christianity, but we Christians dare not defend ourselves. See how it works?

But these discussions are not limited to Religious Studies. God’s good name is slandered in, Science, Philosophy, Humanities…you name it! Christianity is being torn to shreds!

Without minimizing the love and gentleness of campus Christian clubs who still quietly lead individuals to Christ, our universities, as institutions, have been virtually abandoned because people are simply unwilling to take on the administrations or instructors. We are unwilling to stand against the very philosophy of the university. We must weigh the influence of an on-campus Christian fellowship against the barrage of teaching students are hearing day in and day out from their professors.  Why do most of our Christian teachers with the same credentials teach at private schools or Bible colleges? Why have things become so polarized? How is this building the Kingdom of God in any long lasting, substantial way?  Is it not part of our goal to transform institutions? If the answer to these questions is that apologetics have become irrelevant, then allow me to ask, “What exactly is the alternative plan to take back our universities?” Maybe there is no such plan. Oh sure, we can put a few drowning souls on our life raft, but the boat itself? I guess we’ll just let it sink.

Apologetics first became a word associated with Christianity during the Second Century. Early church leaders verified Christianity in the face of Roman persecution, attempting to ward off certain accusations or misunderstandings and in doing so, made the term apologist a popular one. They not only defended Christianity academically, they also defended Christianity morally. Of course, the only morality Roman authorities cared about was the security of the Roman Empire. It was the task of early Christian apologists to assure the emperors and governors that the Gospel of Jesus posed no threat to Rome. But they also pointed to the plain truth of the event. The resurrection of Jesus was verified history and recent history at that. One could check the report of Pontius Pilate in the imperial archives and find all the detail and verification they wanted.

For example, Justin Martyr, an early Christian apologist, made clear reference to a document called the Acts of Pilate in a letter addressed to the Roman Emperor, Antoninus Pius in AD 150.  Describing in detail the passion of Jesus he writes:

“And the expression “They pierced my hands and feet,” was used in reference to the nails of the cross, which were fixed in His hands and feet. And after He was crucified, they cast lots upon His vesture, and they that crucified Him parted it among them.  And that these things did happen, you can ascertain from the ‘Acts of Pontius Pilate’ “(First Apology 35:7-9, translation from Rev. Alexander Roberts D.D. and James Donaldson LL.D editors, The Anti Nicene Fathers, Vol 1, WM B. Eerdman Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, p. 174-75).

Justin went on to list many of Jesus’ miracles, such as the healing of the blind and the lepers. He also credits Jesus with raising people from the dead.  This description of Jesus’ deeds is concluded with the following words:

“And that He did those things, you can learn from the ‘Acts of Pilate’ ” (First Apology 48:3, Ibid. p. 179).

Justin assumed that this record still existed in the official Roman archives and that Antoninus Pius could verify the facts easily.  Justin’s whole purpose in writing his letter was to obtain mercy from the highest official in the known world, thus sparing the Christian community a persecution, which was becoming so commonplace.  It is unlikely that Justin would ask a Roman Emperor to check a document if he did not feel extremely confident that the document existed.  Otherwise, he would be foolishly putting his own life and reputation at risk.

Today, we have the same task, to defend Christianity morally and intellectually.  The field of Apologetics is not just about dusty archaeology and museum housed papyrus. When somebody asks how a loving God could send somebody to hell, they are asking for apologetics. When your friend wants to know why Jesus is the only way to God, as opposed to some other sincere religion, he or she is asking for apologetics. How will God judge the people who never heard or Jesus? Why did the God of the Old Testament command war? Isn’t He a God of peace? And isn’t the Bible kind of chauvinistic and behind the times?  Why does the Bible say that pre-marital sex is a sin?  Why does the Bible teach homosexuality is a sin? Didn’t God create homosexuals just the way they are?  Doesn’t God want everyone to be happy? Such questions not only ask for apologetics, they scream out for them! Whenever I do a debate on a college campus, the place is packed. Just a few years ago at ASU, we had to seat 600, (200 on the floor) in a room that only held 400, and turn another 150 away at the door! Why? Because even though debates were the original purpose of universities, they are seldom done today and when they happen, students eat them up with a spoon.

Allow me to offer a few obvious but important reasons why apologetics are still relevant today:

1) Apologetics are commanded in scripture.

1 Peter 3:12

“Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,”

The word for answer in Greek is apologia. And so, to begin this discussion with the simplest foundation possible, one who claims that the subject of apologetics is irrelevant, is claiming that a command from Scripture is irrelevant.

Often, Christians view debate as something either too cerebral or too confrontational. I remind you that Jesus debated with Pharisees all the time. In fact, if we removed such conversations from the Bible, our Gospels would be very brief.  In Acts, we also read about a man named, Apollos:

Acts 18:28

“For he vigorously refuted the Jews in public debate, proving from the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ. “

And let us not forget the very first Christian martyr, Stephen, who was stoned to death for being too persuasive during a debate. Was this some cerebral, fleshly, unspiritual skill? On the contrary, we are told that his wisdom came from the Holy Spirit ( Acts 7).

2) A serious message needs a serious defense.

It is unfair to preach a message as life changing as the Gospel without verification. Think about it. We are literally telling people that they will end up in hell for all of eternity if they do not accept Jesus Christ as their Savior and Lord. Nobody wants to end up in hell. At the same time, nobody wants to dedicate his or her life to a fantasy or a waste of time. People have a right to ask the very understandable question, “How do I know this to be true? You have asked me for a life commitment and painted a horrific picture of what will happen if I refuse. Please convince me that I am committing myself to something real!”

At this point, the smiley Christian replies, “You must accept it on faith.”

Do you see why atheists have a heyday with Christianity?  Why should people follow something that is not true? In most of my formal debates, the opponent begins by talking about the ridiculousness of blind faith. It is only when I define faith differently, that the discussion changes.

When they talk about other disciplines, (history, science, math, politics), people are very interested in facts.  But religion?  That’s a whole different story.  This common approach may be understandable.  Many religions do not offer facts.  Even when we read the New Testament, (which does offer them), we tend to look at passages about faith with a contemporary understanding.   People mistakenly conclude that the Bible is asking us to fry our brains.  They define a Christian as one who says,  “I have no idea whether or not Jesus exists, but, Hey, I know, I’ll just live my life as if He does and when I die, if it turns out that by chance I was right, God will reward me for having been so gullible and stupid.”  Faith is generally perceived as a blind leap in the dark; the naïve acceptance of an unsubstantiated teaching.   Supposedly God is fond of those who worship Him apart from any shred of data.

This popular description of faith is light years from the Biblical definition.  Actually, faith in Jesus’ day was not defined the way twenty-first century Americans use the word.  In a paraphrased nutshell, the Bible says “Since you know that God is real, it would be foolish not to place your faith in Him” (Romans 1:18-23, Acts 17:31).

New Testament writers verified the existence of God before even mentioning faith.  They were convinced that Jesus’ resurrection from the dead was a fact (I Cor. 15).  Most of them had witnessed it themselves and they were confident that recent history would satisfy anyone who had not been there.  Even more significant, the Holy Spirit continued to bear witness as He worked in the hearts of seeking people.

“And this is how we know that He lives in us:  We know it by the Spirit He gave us” ( I John 3:24).

In other words, a person could meet God!  Faith, for the Biblical generation, had to do with trusting this God Whom they’d just met to work in their lives.

Supposing I asked a friend to deposit a thousand dollar check for me.  It may take faith to believe that he will head for the bank instead of heading for Las Vegas, but I will not doubt that my friend exists or question whether or not we really had a conversation.

This is the same kind of faith children have in their parents.  One may count on a parent for food, shelter, love, attention, advice, etc., but children will have such dependence because they already know their parents.  Likewise, since I am convinced of God’s reality, I have faith enough to count on Him and obey Him.

My Christian pilgrimage has forced me to accept two depressing realities.  1) When it comes to religion, most people are not interested in truth.   2) Many American churchgoers are also uninterested in truth.

But Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth and the life.  No one comes to the Father but through me” (John 14:6).  These words must mean something and there is no law of literary criticism that can transpose them to read,  “I am what ever you want truth to be.  I am that zone of comfort which exists in your imagination to get you through your version of life.”  Maybe, instead, the words mean exactly what they say.  Maybe it’s time to admit that if Christianity isn’t true, it is meaningless.  We should stop evangelizing.  We should stop going to church.  We should stop doing whatever we associate with Christianity.

“And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that He raised Christ from the dead” (I Cor.  15:14-15).

3) Church History has shown us that not all church trends are good.

There is a new and popular movement today called The Emergent Church. About ninety percent of it is attractive and dead on accurate. That makes the fallacious ten percent all the more potent! Truth mixed with falsehood is a dangerous drink. This movement takes Paul’s challenge of being “all things to all people” and applies it to our American culture today. I am in complete agreement when they talk about contextualization. We must speak in a language that people understand. We must be relevant.

But as I said, the remaining ten percent of this movement is deadly. We are starting to hear that it is arrogant to claim we have a corner on the truth. We are also being told how presumptuous it is to believe we can interpret the Bible accurately.

I have two simple questions for those who embrace this small, but significant, portion of Emergent Church Theology:

1) If we cannot interpret the Bible accurately, why did God bother to give it to us? If it is only about our opinions, why not just speculate about God over coffee at Starbucks and leave our Bibles at home?

2) I love it when one claims it is arrogant to talk about truth. I always like to ask, “Is it just your opinion that one should not claim truth, or is it absolutely true that one should not claim truth?”

They are never saying it as a humble opinion. They are always scolding us for being too dogmatic and in doing so, they reveal dogma of their own.

The Emergent Church, in the name of modern relevance, is actually about to repeat church history from one-hundred years ago, the Liberal-Fundamentalist Split, in which sincere pastors tried to make the Bible conform to modern thought.  This was done because too many people bought the lie that what is current and what looks sophisticated, must also be true. And now, today, ironically, in the name of truth, The Emergent Church is catering to Post-Modernism’s claim that truth can not be known.

Evangelicalism began years later as an offshoot of Fundamentalism. It said, “Why let Liberal theologians claim all the intellectual ground? One can defend the Bible and use critical thinking at the same time.”

Today, The Emergent Church is splitting The Evangelical Church and reinventing the wheel.

Such a subject takes a book to explain and I only wanted a short detour here, so, to be fair, let me say that The Emergent Church is a wide, inclusive movement and not everybody involved can be painted with a broad brush. I am generalizing.

But the dismissal of apologetics in church today is not merely the result of new movements. Often, it is much more personal. Sometimes, pastors feel threatened when they are barraged with skeptical questions about the faith. I do not mean to sound critical of pastors. They do a great job and they have a difficult task. The Bible teaches that we all have different spiritual gifts. According to Ephesians 4, there is a difference between the office of pastor and the office of evangelist and an apologist does one kind of evangelism. When I mentioned earlier that we were commanded to give  reasonable answers for our faith, I did not mean to suggest that every Christian has the exact same skill. Such commands are given to the church at large. Generally speaking, a pastor will teach theology and help people apply the Scripture to their lives. They also do counseling, they intervene during times of family crisis, and they administer the cohesiveness of the church. This is a full time job and pastors cannot be expected to also be effective evangelists. At the same time, it is the pastor’s job to nurture a wide range of ministry in the body. If they are not comfortable with apologetics, they are at least responsible to refer people to an apologist. To the credit of my own pastor, he sought me out and talked me into joining his church because he felt apologetics were extremely important. He too, enjoys studying apologetics, but his pastoral duties limit how much time he can throw that direction. He still had the integrity and humility to admit when a need in his church was not being met.

Yes, kudos to my pastor, but let’s be honest:  All too often, pastors take a different course. Since they, themselves, are not into academia, they downplay academia. This may be a cover up for their ruffled pride. We start hearing things like, “Jesus is concerned about your heart, not your mind.”  Actually, Jesus told us to love God with our hearts and our minds. (Matt. 22:37).

4) As Christians, we are commanded to be courageous and not intimidated.

I want to be fair here. I know many campus ministers personally. They are wonderful people and when they tell me apologetics is irrelevant to the college campus today, I believe they are being sincere. Although I disagree, I can see they truly believe that Post-Modernism needs a new approach.

But even though I can vouch for my own friends, I cannot vouch for everybody. Sometimes, in the name of “methodology” or “spirituality” we are only experiencing cowardice.

Once, while participating in a panel discussion at Fresno State, a fellow panelist (whom I’ll leave unnamed) warned us all to avoid the subject of homosexuality. Otherwise we would get kicked off the campus and not allowed to do ministry at all, and well, Gee, God wants us to be able to do ministry, right?

On a larger scale, churches may soon be asked to give up their tax-exempt status if they refuse to marry gay people or even if they preach against homosexuality. Although lately, churches and campus ministries have done a better job of reaching out in love and compassion to homosexuals as individuals, they tend to roll over and play dead in the face of homosexual activists, who, in the name of tolerance, are completely intolerant of Christianity.

Just watch:  A time will come when we will need some courage and many of our Evangelical pastors will start saying things like, “Christ was about compassion. Christ was about love.”

Yes Christ was compassionate. But allow me to translate the statement above more accurately. “If we lose our tax exempt status, and our people cannot get a tax break for their contributions, who will tithe any more?”

Persecution is on the horizon but only in a subtle way. We will not see all churches closed down. No indeed! Instead, we will only see churches that refuse to be Politically Correct closed down.

But part of the Gospel is speaking out against all evil, all hypocrisy and all immorality. Yes, our God is merciful and He forgives a violation of the standard, but we do not pretend the standard doesn’t exist, simply because we fear repercussion.

When Peter and John were dragged before the Sanhedrin and commanded to stop preaching about Jesus, they replied,

“Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God’s sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard” (Acts 4:20).

Conclusion: What has the abandonment of apologetics accomplished in our universities today?  In the seventies, professors were only slamming the Bible. Now, we hear that America itself is evil. But such evil developed because “the evil Christianity was the cornerstone of Western Civilization.”

I once had a college student (an Evangelical Christian, mind you) tell me that America was the most evil nation on Earth. He was putting us ahead of North Korea, Iran, etc. He had nothing to back this up, other than the fact that he heard it from his instructor.

If America is an evil culture, many of its citizens must also be evil. In fact, half of its citizens are evil, men! In one extreme, but horrifying case, Catherine MacKinnon, at the University of Michigan and Yale, teaches that all men are rapists. Even if a woman has a loving husband, when they sleep together, she may think he is loving her, but he is actually raping her. Such professors will never be fired.  The college would be too scared of a lawsuit and would not want to be viewed as persecuting women.

Speaking of women, only recently, Wendy Doniger of the University of Chicago taught that Sarah Palin is not a real woman, even though she has a womb. A real woman would be Pro-Choice and Pro-Lesbian. Is Wendy Doniger aware that the leading opponents to abortion over the years have been women and not men? One would think a college professor would have such information at her fingertips.  Now, is Miss Doniger  entitled to her opinion?  Of course. She should be allowed to say whatever she wants without going to jail. That is what our constitution guarantees. But it does not guarantee that pea-brains be permitted to teach at an institution of higher learning!

When Ward Churchill, at the University of Colorado, claimed that the victims of 9/11 were likened to Nazis, he was defended by the university on the basis of free speech. Would they offer such a defense to a Pro-Life professor or a professor with a different view of homosexuality or a professor who taught the Bible without first showing what a stupid book it was?

Of course, Conservative guest speakers are still allowed on college campuses (at the moment) but how often do professors encourage their students to throw pies at those dastardly Conservatives who do not deserve to be heard?  After all, those guys are against the National Endowment of the Arts, which display Christ in a pool of urine and anybody who does not want to support such beautiful art with tax payer money believes in censorship and, well, we don’t believe in censorship, so throw a pie in that guy’s face and don’t allow anybody to hear what he has to say!

But I saved the best for last. At a recent debate in San Diego, my opponent claimed the Bible promoted rape. That’s right, you heard me correctly: Rape. I was able to get up and say emphatically, “So…The Bible promotes rape? THAT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE!” I proceeded to show how he had taken an Old Testament passage completely out of context. Nobody in the room could deny how foolish this man looked for making such a statement, but how often do people like that make their point without being challenged?  He was challenged that night, maybe for the first time. How? I used apologetics.

This is Bob Siegel, making the obvious, obvious.

Scripture taken from THE HOLY BIBLE

New International Version  NIV

Copyright  1973, 1979, 1984 by International Bible Society

Used by permission of Zondervan Publishing House.

All rights reserved.

Share this on