Does apologetics "work"?

[Caliban]

According to your protestant tradition, is one saved by faith? Or are they saved by grace through faith?

Remember, "Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, "Jesus be cursed," and no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit." -1 Corinthians 12:3

It was by grace alone through faith alone. I held to the 5 Sola's.

 

[Jok]

I'd like to hear a little more about the particulars that led you away from the faith (or perhaps about the straw that broke the camels back, so to speak), but I don't believe that you can do that on the public boards (house rules and all).

What is this rule? I don’t see people pulling punches at all in this section. And I‘Ve seen people mentioning why they lost faith several times. Also, why would non-Christians telling a story about why they stopped believing be considered any more of a threat than non-Christians explanation why they would never ever believe in the first place?

 

[cloudyday2]

Apologetics can defend the faith against some reason for disbelief.

For example, I might say there is no way that Jesus could have bodily risen from the dead because I have his skeleton, and then an apologist can debunk my skeleton of Jesus.

There might be some people who are blocked from belief by my skeleton of Jesus even though they have reasons to believe such as personal spiritual experiences. In that case, the apologist can make the critical difference.

 

[Caliban]

What is this rule? I don’t see people pulling punches at all in this section. And I‘Ve seen people mentioning why they lost faith several times. Also, why would non-Christians telling a story about why they stopped believing be considered any more of a threat than non-Christians explanation why they would never ever believe in the first place?

Maybe it's not a rule, but as a non-believer, it is easy to step on toes around here.

 

[Caliban]

Apologetics can defend the faith against some reason for disbelief.

Maybe, but reasons for disbelief usually originate from bad arguments or bad apologetics. Often believers think arguments sound much better that they are because of confirmation bias.

 

[Jok]

Maybe it's not a rule, but as a non-believer, it is easy to step on toes around here.

I’ve read in here much more than I’ve posted. As far as I have seen eye gouging, hair pulling, and biting are all quite common in here, just ask @2PhiloVoid lol

 

[Caliban]

I’ve read in here much more than I’ve posted. As far as I have seen eye gouging, hair pulling, and biting are all quite common in here, just ask @2PhiloVoid lol

As someone with a lot of Irish blood--sounds like a great time.

 

[St_Worm2]

What is this rule? I don’t see people pulling punches at all in this section. And I‘Ve seen people mentioning why they lost faith several times. Also, why would non-Christians telling a story about why they stopped believing be considered any more of a threat than non-Christians explanation why they would never ever believe in the first place?

Hey Jok, the main house/site rules make it pretty clear.

Promoting* or proselytizing religious beliefs or religions other than Christianity is not allowed.

* Promotion is defined as encouragement of the progress, growth, or acceptance of something including advertising and publicity.

Terms of Service and Christian Forum Rules | Christian Forums
.​

Talking about one's faith (or lack thereof) can be done, but with care, because overstepping can result in our mods removing part or all of a post that goes against the rules.

CFcom has been at this for more than two decades now, and I have come to trust that most, if not all of the rules that they've put in place (many due to experience) are beneficial, and no doubt a big part of the reason that this forum survives and thrives while many other Christian forums, sadly, do not.

God bless you!

--David

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Maybe, but reasons for disbelief usually originate from bad arguments or bad apologetics. Often believers think arguments sound much better that they are because of confirmation bias.

It's a good thing I don't suffer from that malady; but there are those who seem to have their own confirmation bias against the idea that I don't suffer from confirmation bias. Go figure!

 

[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?

You see, Caliban, some of my resistence here is that I've been poaching [yes, I said poaching ] these kinds of topics for a couple of years here already. Hence the following thread I made last Fall:

Should Christians Abandon Apologetics?

 

[Caliban]

You see, Caliban, some of my resistence here is that I've been poaching [yes, I said poaching ] these kinds of topics for a couple of years here already. Hence the following thread I made last Fall:

Should Christians Abandon Apologetics?

If by apologetics people mean anything like what William Lane Craig does--it is probably best to abandon it.

 

[Caliban]

I suppose someone knows, why is the Philosophy section read only? It would be the right place to post discussions on epistemology.

*Nevermind--I found the answer. Apparently every thread went off the rails.

 

[Jok]

Hey Jok, the main house/site rules make it pretty clear.

Promoting* or proselytizing religious beliefs or religions other than Christianity is not allowed.

* Promotion is defined as encouragement of the progress, growth, or acceptance of something including advertising and publicity.

Terms of Service and Christian Forum Rules | Christian Forums
.​

Talking about one's faith (or lack thereof) can be done, but with care, because overstepping can result in our mods removing part or all of a post that goes against the rules.

CFcom has been at this for more than two decades now, and I have come to trust that most, if not all of the rules that they've put in place (many due to experience) are beneficial, and no doubt a big part of the reason that this forum survives and thrives while many other Christian forums, sadly, do not.

God bless you!

--David

The only things I’ve ever noticed being enforced were people being told to chill out if rude personal attacks were going, or if a Christian accused another Christian of being a fake Christian.

Well there’s a simple solution, @Caliban can just tell his story, and if nothing happens nothing happens. But if he gets banned for life then we’ll know, problem solved! Lol

 

[Caliban]

The only things I’ve ever noticed being enforced were people being told to chill out if rude personal attacks were going, or if a Christian accused another Christian of being a fake Christian.

Well there’s a simple solution, @Caliban can just tell his story, and if nothing happens nothing happens. But if he gets banned for life then we’ll know, problem solved! Lol

I don't think my story is all that exciting; it would be better to just go watch Dunkirk or an old western--I like Shane.

 

[St_Worm2]

The only things I’ve ever noticed being enforced were people being told to chill out if rude personal attacks were going, or if a Christian accused another Christian of being a fake Christian.

Well there’s a simple solution, @Caliban can just tell his story, and if nothing happens nothing happens. But if he gets banned for life then we’ll know, problem solved! Lol

Banned for life would take an extra-special effort on @Caliban's part, I think

I also think that certain posts actually fail the test because somebody has a problem with them, reports them, and makes them sound worse than they really are. While other posts, that probably should be deleted, aren't (because they go unreported).

 

[InterestedAtheist]

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?

Apologetics works very well at its intended function: to reassure believers that there are actually answers, and the skeptics who pose tough questions have been confounded. It doesn't really work at what it says its for - to convince nonbelievers of the truth of Christianity - but that's okay, because it's not really trying to.

 

[Caliban]

Apologetics works very well at its intended function: to reassure believers that there are actually answers, and the skeptics who pose tough questions have been confounded. It doesn't really work at what it says its for - to convince nonbelievers of the truth of Christianity - but that's okay, because it's not really trying to.

That tends to be how I see it too. But I am surprised by the variety of thinking about apologetics on this forum--some Christians don't even think it has value for converting non-believers.

 

[redleghunter]

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?

Expanding on 1 Peter 3:15

1 Peter 3: NASB

13Who is there to harm you if you prove zealous for what is good? 14But even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are blessed. AND DO NOT FEAR THEIR INTIMIDATION, AND DO NOT BE TROUBLED, 15but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence; 16and keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame. 17For it is better, if God should will it so, that you suffer for doing what is right rather than for doing what is wrong. 18For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit;​

Notice Peter used key words in the context of “intimidation” and “slandered.”

The response is to “to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence.”

Then Peter addresses the hope: “For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit;“

The point here is not to convince someone who slanders but to express the hope. To put it more clearly the hope is not to argue what one considers rational arguments but the hope which is the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ Who redeems and restores us.

For some reasons I’ve noticed skeptics seem to dance in the margins avoiding a direct discussion of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Some skeptics enter an argument thinking Christians just believing words and statements is the total construct of their faith. This is a huge error in that no one should assume Christian faith is solely based on materialistic claims. You seek a discussion to convince you on purely the material and physical. Christianity is supernatural beyond the materialistic but God’s revelation is to us is physically manifested.

For example, one skeptic might ask “why doesn’t God show me a sign of His existence.” The answer is He has by everything you see around you in creation. God has revealed himself as Creator of time, space and matter. More importantly for we fallen human beings God has manifested Himself in the flesh as the Person of Jesus Christ. So if you want to know what God says then listen to Jesus.

Lastly, apologetics can be very helpful to refute the assertions of skeptics who offer erroneous opinions from the Skeptic’s Annotated Bible commentary.

 

[redleghunter]

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.

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.

Good point. No one was ever “argued into the Kingdom of God.”

Even the Apostle Paul when speaking to pagan Gentiles in Athens presented the truth and some believed and some did not. Only difference he employed was to start the pagans with their statue of “to the unknown God” creation and being.

Then as they wanted to hear more he presented the Gospel.

 

[redleghunter]

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.

Thank you for sharing the above. This is why the focus is on the hope and not to “win” an argument of how many angels fit in the head of a pin.