Does apologetics "work"?

[Caliban]

I know this is a clickbait type of question--bear with me for a second. I am interested in what you think about the role of apologetics when discussing the faith with non-believers on this forum.

Recently I have engaged several believing members of this forum, across multiple treads, and I have notices a recurring theme. Often believers are claiming that God cannot be proven. I know most of you would agree with that statement as it stands, but in your opinion, can evidence for God be reasonable shown to point that direction. If so, do you think evidentiary apologetics it is a fruitful thing to engage in?

When I was a believer, I believed in God's sovereignty in Election, whereby God saved some and passed over others. However, I still thought evangelism and apologetics where implied because 1 Pete 3:15.

Given that I left the church and no longer believe, you might think I am attacking or insincere. I am sincere--I am just not convinced. Many discussion on this thread include claims by believers who tend to not provide evidence or a rational for theistic claims when asked for them by unbelievers. This is frustrating for advancing dialogue. Why do you think this often happens?--pease don't take that personal.

My longer form question is: given all the above, should Christians engage non-believers on this forum by engaging in apologetics and by attempting to make compelling arguments for their claims as a way to convince them those claims are true?

 

[Carl Emerson]

We are called to present the truth whether it is accepted or not.

My experience has shown that apologetics rarely wins souls - rather an encounter with Jesus is needed.

We can easily become 'Christian' and never meet Him.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

I know this is a clickbait type of question--bear with me for a second. I am interested in what you think about the role of apologetics when discussing the faith with non-believers on this forum.

Recently I have engaged several believing members of this forum, across multiple treads, and I have notices a recurring theme. Often believers are claiming that God cannot be proven. I know most of you would agree with that statement as it stands, but in your opinion, can evidence for God be reasonable shown to point that direction. If so, do you think evidentiary apologetics it is a fruitful thing to engage in?

When I was a believer, I believed in God's sovereignty in Election, whereby God saved some and passed over others. However, I still thought evangelism and apologetics where implied because 1 Pete 3:15.

Given that I left the church and no longer believe, you might think I am attacking or insincere. I am sincere--I am just not convinced. Many discussion on this thread include claims by believers who tend to not provide evidence or a rational for theistic claims when asked for them by unbelievers. This is frustrating for advancing dialogue. Why do you think this often happens?--pease don't take that personal.

My longer form question is: given all the above, should Christians engage non-believers on this forum by engaging in apologetics and by attempting to make compelling arguments for their claims as a way to convince them those claims are true?

Short answer: yes!

Longer answer: It very much depends on the person. I see some very ill-informed atheists over the years (e.g. Richard Dawkins) who have little or no idea what Christians believe and spend time mocking what little they know. I would like to think that over the years I have contributed something to breaking that ignorance and teaching some truth about Christianity.

On the other hand I'm under no illusion that this will lead to people becoming Christians. I wasn't apologetic'd into the faith and I don't know personally of anyone who was. David Robertson tells of someone who read his book, The Dawkins Letters and and became uncertain enough about his atheism who went to church to take a look and THAT convinced him eventually.

No Apologist should be pushing to convert people, they should be bringing people into relationship with God which is what it is really all about.

You also mention lack of 'evidence'. Atheists come in all shapes and sizes. For every sincere seeker, there are a dozen who are out to pick hole or mock. In addition atheists and theists can't always agree on what constitutes 'evidence' and some even demand 'proof', which even science doesn't have for most things except mathematics.

 

[Caliban]

Short answer: yes!

Longer answer: It very much depends on the person. I see some very ill-informed atheists over the years (e.g. Richard Dawkins) who have little or no idea what Christians believe and spend time mocking what little they know. I would like to think that over the years I have contributed something to breaking that ignorance and teaching some truth about Christianity.

On the other hand I'm under no illusion that this will lead to people becoming Christians. I wasn't apologetic'd into the faith and I don't know personally of anyone who was. David Robertson tells of someone who read his book, The Dawkins Letters and and became uncertain enough about his atheism who went to church to take a look and THAT convinced him eventually.

No Apologist should be pushing to convert people, they should be bringing people into relationship with God which is what it is really all about.

You also mention lack of 'evidence'. Atheists come in all shapes and sizes. For every sincere seeker, there are a dozen who are out to pick hole or mock. In addition atheists and theists can't always agree on what constitutes 'evidence' and some even demand 'proof', which even science doesn't have for most things except mathematics.

Thanks for your thoughtful response. There are many atheist who are uninformed about the faith. But I am an unbeliever of many faiths I don not understand. I am not sure that if I knew more about them I would change my mind on their truth claims. In this sense, I don't think it is relevant that Dawkins is unfamiliar with the inter-working of theology.

What do you mean by a "sincere seeker?" I am not sure I would qualify. Since I used to teach apologetics at my church, I am aware of the bad arguments I used to make. I am not exactly expecting someone to provide a good argument for the faith--but you never know.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I know this is a clickbait type of question--bear with me for a second. I am interested in what you think about the role of apologetics when discussing the faith with non-believers on this forum.

Recently I have engaged several believing members of this forum, across multiple treads, and I have notices a recurring theme. Often believers are claiming that God cannot be proven. I know most of you would agree with that statement as it stands, but in your opinion, can evidence for God be reasonable shown to point that direction. If so, do you think evidentiary apologetics it is a fruitful thing to engage in?

When I was a believer, I believed in God's sovereignty in Election, whereby God saved some and passed over others. However, I still thought evangelism and apologetics where implied because 1 Pete 3:15.

Given that I left the church and no longer believe, you might think I am attacking or insincere. I am sincere--I am just not convinced. Many discussion on this thread include claims by believers who tend to not provide evidence or a rational for theistic claims when asked for them by unbelievers. This is frustrating for advancing dialogue. Why do you think this often happens?--pease don't take that personal.

My longer form question is: given all the above, should Christians engage non-believers on this forum by engaging in apologetics and by attempting to make compelling arguments for their claims as a way to convince them those claims are true?

Say...... whuuuuuuuuuuuuut ??????????????

It's not my fault if you don't like "my" apologetic approach, or the "kind" of evidence I have, or you don't even wish to engage my whole matrix of belief ........ because YOU think it's.....(what was the word you used)..............oh yeah: ESOTERIC !!!

 

[eleos1954]

I know this is a clickbait type of question--bear with me for a second. I am interested in what you think about the role of apologetics when discussing the faith with non-believers on this forum.

Recently I have engaged several believing members of this forum, across multiple treads, and I have notices a recurring theme. Often believers are claiming that God cannot be proven. I know most of you would agree with that statement as it stands, but in your opinion, can evidence for God be reasonable shown to point that direction. If so, do you think evidentiary apologetics it is a fruitful thing to engage in?

When I was a believer, I believed in God's sovereignty in Election, whereby God saved some and passed over others. However, I still thought evangelism and apologetics where implied because 1 Pete 3:15.

Given that I left the church and no longer believe, you might think I am attacking or insincere. I am sincere--I am just not convinced. Many discussion on this thread include claims by believers who tend to not provide evidence or a rational for theistic claims when asked for them by unbelievers. This is frustrating for advancing dialogue. Why do you think this often happens?--pease don't take that personal.

My longer form question is: given all the above, should Christians engage non-believers on this forum by engaging in apologetics and by attempting to make compelling arguments for their claims as a way to convince them those claims are true?

This is a christian forum .... EVERYBODY is aware of this .... if anyone doesn't want to be engaged by christians then there are other forums .... fact is ... everyone on here does want to be engaged for various reasons .... that's why they come here ... including yourself.

Why do you come here?

 

[Caliban]

We are called to present the truth whether it is accepted or not.

If non-believers do not begin by presuming it is true, what is the next step besides a spiritual answer like prayer or it's in gods hands? That's not meant to be snide.

 

[Caliban]

Say...... whuuuuuuuuuuuuut ??????????????

It's not my fault if you don't like "my" apologetic approach, or the "kind" of evidence I have, or you don't even wish to engage my whole matrix of belief ........ because YOU think it's.....(what was the word you used)..............oh yeah: ESOTERIC !!!

Are you okay?

 

[Caliban]

This is a christian forum .... EVERYBODY is aware of this .... if anyone doesn't want to be engaged by christians then there are other forums .... fact is ... everyone on here does want to be engaged for various reasons .... that's why they come here ... including yourself.

Why do you come here?

I think you misread my post. I am not sure what your concern is. But I can tell you why I am here. I was a Christian my entire life until a few years ago, I enjoy staying engaged in topics I studied for years, and I enjoy engaging with others I disagree with. I don't like living in an idea vacuum where everyone thinks like me.

 

[eleos1954]

I think you misread my post. I am not sure what your concern is. But I can tell you why I am here. I was a Christian my entire life until a few years ago, I enjoy staying engaged in topics I studied for years, and I enjoy engaging with others I disagree with. I don't like living in an idea vacuum where everyone thinks like me.

I enjoy engaging with others I disagree with ...

so here to argue for the sake of arguing.

 

[Caliban]

so here to argue for the sake of arguing.

Yes, sometimes it does take the form of an argument. A constructive one hopefully.

 

[ZNP]

I know this is a clickbait type of question--bear with me for a second. I am interested in what you think about the role of apologetics when discussing the faith with non-believers on this forum.

Recently I have engaged several believing members of this forum, across multiple treads, and I have notices a recurring theme. Often believers are claiming that God cannot be proven. I know most of you would agree with that statement as it stands, but in your opinion, can evidence for God be reasonable shown to point that direction. If so, do you think evidentiary apologetics it is a fruitful thing to engage in?

There are 12 gates into the New Jerusalem. I can imagine that there are those that will be benefitted. Thomas said "unless he saw the nail prints he wouldn't believe". The Lord didn't condemn him, He showed him the nail prints. So, I do believe there is physical evidence of the resurrection that would hold up in court.

I also agree with the other posters who point out this is not a typical path salvation experience, but who knows, maybe for 8% of believers it is.

 

[Carl Emerson]

If non-believers do not begin by presuming it is true, what is the next step besides a spiritual answer like prayer or it's in gods hands?

Well the way it is meant to work according to John 17 is that seekers witness the love of Jesus among believers and this registers deeply within them because such love is not evidenced in the world at large.

However the way we do church usually excludes real community as we see in Acts so there is often not so much to see.

Which ever way, a personal deep encounter with Him is an essential beginning, however I have often said that we trust science because of the proven reliability of the experimental method - God doesn't mind being experimented with!
So just ask that if He is real, to convince you.
Be warned however, this is dangerous and may change your life.

 

[eleos1954]

Yes, sometimes it does take the form of an argument. A constructive one hopefully.

What do you expect to accomplish?

 

[Caliban]

So just ask that if He is real, to convince you.
Be warned however, this is dangerous and may change your life.

I have done this in tears. When questioning my faith, I had a very real crisis. God never came. When I ask Christians about this they either quote 1 John 2:19 or they say I was not truly repentant. Of course they can't possibly know that. People usually stop there and move on without further discussion.

 

[Caliban]

What do you expect to accomplish?

Conversation, to learn something new, and to keep my hand in the theological game.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

I know this is a clickbait type of question--bear with me for a second. I am interested in what you think about the role of apologetics when discussing the faith with non-believers on this forum.

Recently I have engaged several believing members of this forum, across multiple treads, and I have notices a recurring theme. Often believers are claiming that God cannot be proven. I know most of you would agree with that statement as it stands, but in your opinion, can evidence for God be reasonable shown to point that direction. If so, do you think evidentiary apologetics it is a fruitful thing to engage in?

When I was a believer, I believed in God's sovereignty in Election, whereby God saved some and passed over others. However, I still thought evangelism and apologetics where implied because 1 Pete 3:15.

Given that I left the church and no longer believe, you might think I am attacking or insincere. I am sincere--I am just not convinced. Many discussion on this thread include claims by believers who tend to not provide evidence or a rational for theistic claims when asked for them by unbelievers. This is frustrating for advancing dialogue. Why do you think this often happens?--pease don't take that personal.

My longer form question is: given all the above, should Christians engage non-believers on this forum by engaging in apologetics and by attempting to make compelling arguments for their claims as a way to convince them those claims are true?

Christianity went unopposed for about 15 centuries. Now the numbers are dropping and the religion is dying. The religion will adapt or die, and it seems slow to adapt since it was an apex predator for so long.

The current brand of apologetics is disorganized and aimless. It advances arguments that are bad, and fails to advance arguments that might be good. Literally every argument they've put forth is easily debunked aside from the argument from fine tuning. And I've never seen a Christian reference the Fermi paradox, which is a grim reality for atheists.

 

[Caliban]

There are 12 gates into the New Jerusalem. I can imagine that there are those that will be benefitted. Thomas said "unless he saw the nail prints he wouldn't believe". The Lord didn't condemn him, He showed him the nail prints. So, I do believe there is physical evidence of the resurrection that would hold up in court.

I also agree with the other posters who point out this is not a typical path salvation experience, but who knows, maybe for 8% of believers it is.

I am unaware of what you mean by the 12 gates into new Jerusalem. I am failure with Rome--the city on 12 hills and that there were 12 gates on the temple in Jerusalem--the Jaffa Gate, Herod's gate etc...

 

[Caliban]

Christianity went unopposed for about 15 centuries. Now the numbers are dropping and the religion is dying. The religion will adapt or die, and it seems slow to adapt since it was an apex predator for so long.

The current brand of apologetics is disorganized and aimless. It advances arguments that are bad, and fails to advance arguments that might be good. Literally every argument they've put forth is easily debunked aside from the argument from fine tuning. And I've never seen a Christian reference the Fermi paradox, which is a grim reality for atheists.

Agreed! Also reminds me of Clarks Law concerning technology being indistinguishable from a god.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

know this is a clickbait type of question--bear with me for a second. I am interested in what you think about the role of apologetics when discussing the faith with non-believers on this forum.

Yes in the long run. Apologetics works or at least has value. It often does not work when it comes to its intended target aka unbelievers, even though it occasionally does.

But here is a list of ideas.


1) I think Apologetics is important because of the mental life of Christianity etc. There was a book put out called "The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind" put out by an Evangelical Academic, the scandal of the book is that their was not much of an Evangelical mind as the author put it. But that sort of thing, I think is important to the Faith at large. There actually are a lot of Bible verses that are positive concerning reason and Faith, especially concerning epistemology etc.


2) There can be a reverse side of #1 among Atheists and other skeptics as far as stereotypes etc. In the past, talking to atheists I've been surprised how many assume some obsolete ideas/ tropes like "The Conflict Thesis".

Conflict thesis - Wikipedia


3) When it comes to my own Faith, I have been positively influenced by certain Christian Apologists like Hugh Ross. I learned that Science and Faith are not only not in conflict, but if your an old Earth Creationist that really is the sweet spot!


4) I also think this sort of thing is worth it, for kids going to college etc. People like to use words like "indoctrination" in terms of religion etc. but I think this sort of thing fits other people like atheistic professors who believe their mission in life is to deconvert Christian students etc.