Why Apologetics Won’t Work

By Dan Grossenbach

If apologetics is so great and its arguments compelling, why isn’t everyone convinced of Christianity? This is where the doctrine of election debate between Calvinists and Arminians normally comes in, but I think both sides are overlooking a simpler and self-evident truth of human nature – one they can both agree on. People aren’t robots. Each of us view new truth claims through a unique lens formed by our conditioning, cares, and community.

I’ve been writing, debating, and teaching apologetics for 15 years and I’m often asked by my students why their friends aren’t compelled by the same arguments they are. Those in my Reason Why class love apologetics for how it’s played a role in their spiritual development so they naturally want the same thing for their friends. Discovering the gospel is true based on independent evidence changes everything. Faith of wishful thinking becomes faith based on reality and the focal point of our life. Despite this, apologetics doesn’t play the same role for everyone.

It took me a while to realize this. At first, I thought everyone would openly consider the evidence and either confirm or change their beliefs accordingly. Not so. I’ve learned how we respond to our beliefs aren’t a matter of evidence and reason alone but just a part. Failure to appreciate this really frustrated me at first. I got discouraged when a powerful case for Christianity and logical fallacies were shrugged off so quickly by my friends. Once I understood other factors at play in worldview development, I became a better apologist. I now shake my head wondering why I didn’t see this earlier. The very same factors for those I’m trying to reach were there for me too. My life conditioning, my cares, and my community were far more important than the evidence ever was.


I once was interviewed by a news reporter about hosting Dr. Gilbert Shapiro, the leader of a local atheist group, to speak at our church. I pointed out how Dr. Shapiro and I each have been conditioned throughout our lives to form a perspective on things that matter. We may even come to the same conclusions at times, such as the value in protecting orphans and feeding the poor. Christians and atheists may agree on many things – even that there’s an underlying truth regardless of what either of us believe. I say God exists and Dr. Shapiro thinks He doesn’t. We both can’t be right. There’s a truth behind it all that we should be seeking. I see the world through the lens of of my life which makes sense of everything for me. Dr. Shapiro does likewise.

Atheists, like all of us, can grow accustomed to their understanding that we live in a world without God. In a guest lecture at our church, Dr. Shapiro told us “things are exactly as we would expect them to be if God does not exist.” Growing up in a traditional Jewish family, he couldn’t reconcile a God who would allow the holocaust. In tears, he described an emotional experience he had touring a Nazi concentration camp years earlier. “That could have been me!” he lamented from our stage. For him, his personal experiences made it harder to fit God into his worldview. Absent any contrary influence, this view is strengthened over time so that everything he experienced going forward was made to fit into an atheistic worldview thereby reinforcing his view.

With this information, I could put myself into his shoes, at least a little. If I shared the kind of life experiences Gil had, perhaps I might share this perspective. At the very least, I could sympathize with it. The knee jerk reaction to disagreement on such core beliefs might be to lodge arguments. No doubt, there are plenty of good ones to use, but they only work as far as prior conditioning of life experiences will allow.


We crave what we care about and avoid what bothers us. Yet somehow we expect people to set aside their cares when we share reasons to believe the gospel. When there’s a conflict between reality and our cares, the cares often trump our quest for truth. Part of being human is having personal tastes or aversions that make up our personality. Taken to excess, we slide into addiction on the one hand (desire) or paranoia on the other (aversion). Both cripple our choices and distract us from reality.

I see this as a daily part of my job as a criminal investigator. People living a stable life one day before that extra dose of drugs lose all control the next. The decisions they make going forward are less about reality and more about craving the high and avoiding the crash. You don’t have a drug problem? Not to worry, we all have something far worse: a sin problem.

It’s no coincidence God called the forbidden fruit-bearing tree the “Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil” (Get 2:16-17). Foreknowing their choice, God knew in advance their free-will would teach them a valuable lesson:  the world has natural laws that operate independent of what we want or believe. Namely, acting contrary to God’s will is the knowledge of evil.

This wasn’t just a truth lesson on the existence of evil, but specifically how choosing desire over godly obedience leads to terrible things. It was clear to them God could be trusted and was the source everything needed for human flourishing. Despite knowing this, Adam and Eve chose their desire for the forbidden fruit anyway. If it were only about knowledge of the truth, humans may have permanently changed course after seeing the tragedy of this bad decision. We would have learned the lesson and never been fooled by our desires again. Clearly that’s not the case because we’ve followed their lead ever since. We procrastinate, smoke, gamble, eat junk food, get drunk, overspend, fail to plan, lust, lie, cheat, gossip, or do countless other self-deprecating things knowing well aware of the consequences. This only can happen if humans have the capacity for choosing desire over truth. We all do it, so why expect our friends to fall at the cross when we give them the knowledge we think they need? That’s not to say arguments aren’t worth making. They are, but give it some time and understand the power of desire when you do.


We’re all influenced by people closest to us and surround ourselves with people we admire. From childhood, our conditioning and cares are shaped by our parents, teachers, coaches, and peers. As we grow older, relationships become bound together by common values and beliefs. Eventually, we raise or mentor young people and we become leaders in the community that once shaped us.

I interviewed the local Mormon stake president on stage at our church recently and we’ve met a few times since then. He joined the Mormon church with his parents as a teenager and raised four kids and now has four grandchildren (all Mormons) in addition to his prestigious position as the leader of several LDS churches in a relatively large town. Do you think he has any motivation to skirt around difficulties involving his worldview? The fear of losing his entire community is very real.

How about you? Imagine what would happen to your relationships if you were to leave your church to join Mormonism. Do you remember how your friends in high school and college influenced you in the groups you were in? The pressure of acceptance or fear of rejection in a community is so strong it actually causes us to see the world differently than it really is. We deny truth because community matters more.

It’s no wonder occasionally a conservative Christian is willing to change their view on biblical passages because someone close to them, especially a son or daughter, announces their same sex attraction. A recent Barna study reveals how a shockingly high proportion of Christians hold to beliefs such as new age spirituality or secular scientism which directly conflict with core doctrine of the faith they claim to hold. They are part of a Christian community while rejecting it’s core beliefs. The contradiction is valued less than the power of peer influence. As long as we recognize there’s more at play than reason alone, this won’t catch us off guard in our mission to evangelize the lost and build up the saints.


When I look back at my return to Christianity, it was apologetics that sold me only after I had the conditioning, cares, and community lined up for that to happen. Growing up in a pleasant Christian home, it was easier for me to return to the faith I was already fond of. Some people experience the opposite. For them, harsh memories associated with Christianity (or Christians) repel rather than attract them. Our apologetics training normally doesn’t account for the intangible and moving targets involved with raw human emotion. This must change.

I find apologetics to be much more successful when learning about the person before making a case. For me, Paul’s illustration in 1 Cor 13 is helpful here. Whenever I’m tempted to focus solely on an argument before considering the person’s circumstances, I envision myself frantically banging a gong until they agree with me. That’s not love. Jesus didn’t shy away from debate and was blunt about the consequences of error. Yet, he cares about people enough to get to know them – even today. During his earthly ministry, he related to each person on an intimate level and it changed them (John 4:4-26, Mark 10:17-27, Luke 18:19). Arguments work, but it’s only part of the process.

Dan Grossenbach (M.A. – Biola, 2008) teaches apologetics at Catalina Foothills Church, is a Veritas Forum board member (University of Arizona chapter), Ratio Christi chapter advisor (U of A), and works full time as a federal criminal investigator in Tucson, Arizona.


Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2uxv8dz



Free CrossExamined.org Resource

Get the first chapter of "Stealing From God: Why Atheists Need God to Make Their Case" in PDF.

Powered by ConvertKit
32 replies
  1. A brother in Christ a says:

    This is excellent. I’ve only been able to use this method a few times with people I had a chance to talk to more than a few minutes. But getting to understand circumstances helps out so much while trying to make the case. One pretty common thing I’ve heard from people was something they’ve suffered or seen happen at the hands of Christians. An answer here of course is that you can’t put your faith in man, I.e. other Christians, because man is inextricably broken and you will be disappointed every time. Our faith needs to be in our Lord Jesus Christ, because His love is perfect, and that means He can be trusted completely.

  2. Kalmaro says:

    I appreciate this article a lot. This is why I think the question “If Christianity were true, would you follow it?” Is so powerful. It really gives you an idea of where the other person is coming from.

      • A brother in Christ says:

        Have you ever read the old testament? My guess is probably not. I think you actually got your talking points from someone else without ever investigating for yourself.
        The idea of the whole Bible, not just the new testament, is the story of how man is broken, dead in their sins, and what God did to redeem us.
        See, the problem is that we ourselves can never do anything to redeem ourselves and get to heaven because we have already violated God’s law. So God himself died on a cross, bearing sins that He never committed himself, so that through Him, we can be in God’s presence again and enjoy a love relationship with Him for eternity.
        God does deserve our worship, for He created us, and sustains us and is always pursuing us and is always doing what is best for our souls. This life is temporary. Eternity is a long time. Think about that.

      • Tracey says:

        That is an interesting response as soon as it reads conversion happening; you jump in and become a saviour.
        Who is converting who, and why? What is the name of your religion?
        I don’t really feel your an Atheist Bob its just not ringing true. That last response was the give-away.
        God and his mysterious ways.

          • A brother in Christ says:

            It isn’t the same as Christianity at all. Hinduism as far as I understand has several gods. Islam doesn’t have a way to salvation. Some say, I don’t know if its true or not, that the only way for them to know for sure they’re going to heaven is if they die while killing non Muslims. Christianity on the other hand, there’s one God and he saved us from our own sin by shedding his blood for the salvation of anyone who will put their faith in Him. Christian doctrine is not works based. We cannot do anything on our own to get to heaven. That’s a fundamental difference.

          • A brother in Christ says:

            The Christian faith does have the evidence to back it up.
            The resurrection is what created the new testament writers, not the other way around. These people claimed to be eyewitnesses. Think about this. Why would a fiercely monotheistic people create a story like this. Why would they be willing to give up their lives for something like this unless it were true. These people were beaten, beheaded, crucified, for what? Because they saw Jesus after resurrection. There’s several different historians that mentioned Jesus in their writings and writes a bit about the apostles getting killed. Archeology in most instances back up the claims of the Bible.
            A lot of physicist have come to agree that the universe had a beginning. And seeing how you can’t get something from nothing, there’s really no theories out there that has evidence to back them up. Beginning of life. They have never been able to create life. If evolution was true, they would have been able to create life. But they can’t.
            And finally, if Christianity were false, and had no evidence whatsoever, how did it last 2000 years and counting. People from Greece, rome, babalonia, Norse people’s,. They all had gods. Those gods were abandoned a long time ago after not really that long of a time. Why would people be so committed to a belief if it was just a fable they read in an old book. Ancient literature detailing the gods of old doesn’t persuade people. And people being reviled and attacked on a regular basis, and yet they still have faith.
            No. Christianity can be demonstrated, even if the evidence isn’t definitive, like say, witnessing a resurrected Christ for yourself.

        • Tracey says:

          That question is a standard, ‘poke the bear,’ see what this one does has been answered many times.
          A tempest way to set religions up against each other.
          Regard; none.
          Article much higher calibre.

  3. Susan says:

    Apologetics has trouble being successful and may need to redefine it’s approaches.

    God made His evidence case a long time ago with legal evidence.

    We should point it out more that God’s Testimony and the eyewitness evidence IS evidence. It even has a historical witness backing it up.

    The God of the Bible has thus supplied us with a double witness.

    The people who are currently objecting to the system of evidence that God set in place thousands of years ago to win people over to Christ then are evidence deniers.

    When a motion is made to enter something into evidence the Judge decides whether or not to accept the evidence and in the case of Christianity the Judge actually provided the evidence in such a way that it has withstood the test of time.

    So the evidence deniers who want to change the rules of evidence this late in history are just that. Rule changers and evidence deniers.

    I hope this helps for whoever is reading. Christianity and Judaism has never lacked for witnesses. God has always worked through people going all the way back to Adam and Eve.

    Someone’s inability to accept God’s evidence is no denial of His evidence.

    It just shows how confused they are on evidence questions and how dedicated they are to forcing their will and perspecive and bias ahead of God’s.

    The blaspemy of evidence denial is enough to make one heart sick after having witnesssed it happen so many times wrapped up in intellectualism which is a long time oretentious self defense mechanism which has had a big resurgence with the idolization of reason from the Age of Enlightenment. But without Christ there is really no enlightenment for the individual. No fruit of the Spirit, no personal peace, no love and joy or walk with God.

    God has already provided every evidence needed for an all sufficient faith.

    So don’t let the evidence deniers fool you. They remind me of holocaust deniers denying reality.

    If they can just reframe things mentally then they are such convincing liars that they begin to believe their lies themselves.

    Philosophy is exactly the place where people redefine God’s terms, twist them and meddle with them to suit themselves.

    But God’s Testimony is all sufficient for those who have enough sense to not allow this world to delude them into thinking too far down the wrong paths.

    Thanks be to God for His love and for His Son’s all sufficient work on the Cross.

    1 Corinthians 2:2King James Version (KJV)

    2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

    Faith is the gift of God and the evidence of God’s love and spirit shed in the believer’s heart.

    So be sure to guard your heart believers and don’t let the evidence deniers con you out of accepting anything in it’s place.

    Because while some people are just working their carnal minds. Some people aren’t. They actually have the motive to try and unseat your belief in Christ. Dawkins does or else why the ugly perjorative terms he uses to describe the gift of God. Pure shock tactics on his part.

    Matthew 5
    1Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. 12Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

    All glory and honor to the Father. The only wise king.

  4. Bryan says:

    “If apologetics is so great and its arguments compelling, why isn’t everyone convinced of Christianity?”

    I think it’s because someone like Mr. Grossenbach can write an excellent article (and I must say it’s probably the best one I, as an atheist, have read on this site) and then someone like Susan comes along and destroys his work with a hate filled rant.

    “The blaspemy of evidence denial….”
    “So don’t let the evidence deniers fool you. They remind me of holocaust deniers denying reality….”
    “….don’t let the evidence deniers con you out of accepting anything in it’s place.”

    Cursed atheists! The sooner they burn in hell the better!

    • Susan says:

      O rly? I don’t hold a literal eternal torment position. So next time don’t ascribe words or thoughts to me that I don’t hold.

      But I understand. You never bothered to learn about the thing you like to criticize.

      It’s much easier to attack stereotypes you have created in your own mind.
      Isn’t that called strawmanning?

      Have a great day!

    • A brother in Christ says:

      Bryan. A lot do find the arguments compelling. Some don’t for many different reasons. Some of the most common ones is people don’t want to be held to any standard. They don’t want to leave the cares of the world. Some might have suffered something that they believe to be evidence against it .Some people just don’t actually look at the evidence, which clearly you do read. There is a lot of evidence out there to support Christianity. Everything from science, archeology, historical documents, and some internal evidence within ourselves. I would appeal to you to spend some time reading the Bible for yourself and maybe even talking to a conservative faith leader, spend some time asking questions. Questions you may actually have, not gotcha questions because that won’t help you learn anything. Not implying you will, but it’s a pretty common thing. This is supposing you’re looking for answers of course. I’d be happy to try to answer any quick ones you may have.

      • Bryan says:

        I grew up in a devout Christian home. After I converted to Mormonism I spent hours a day reading the Bible as a Mormon missionary. There is “a lot of evidence” to support Mormonism and Islam according to their adherents. But thanks for your offer anyway.

        • Susan says:

          Mormonism is a cult started by a freemason. Freemasonry is responsible for the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Ku Klux Klan as well. Google it Albert Pike who started the KKK was a high ranking free mason. Charles Taze Russell started the Jehovah’s Witnesses and he was a free mason as well and is buried under a pyramid with a Masonic building near by. Joseph Smith was a freemason, too.

          Google Mormonism and freemasonry on wikipedia.

          Mormonism is not Christianity just like the Jehovah Witnesses aren’t.

          Freemasonry has similarities to a Babylonian mystery religion with all sorts of unChristian rites. Swearing oaths to false deities when Christ said not to swear oaths.

          Putting the lodge and lodge members ahead of God?

          That is not Christian either but a lot of people join freemasonry to network and get ahead not knowing the guiding principles are not Christian because only the very high level initiates know the secrets.

          They say the Orangemen are masonic also.

          Most people aren’t going to do a background check that takes into account the damage that freemasonry has done to people. They just don’t know to do it.

        • Susan says:

          Galatians 1:6-8 King James Version (KJV)

          6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

          7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

          8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

          See above Bryan. There is only one gospel so why is the freemason Joseph Smith listening to angels?

          Here is Moroni from the “Angel Moroni” page on wikipedia:

          The Angel Moroni (/moʊˈroʊnaɪ/[1]) is, in Mormonism, an angel who visited Joseph Smith on numerous occasions, beginning on September 21, 1823. According to Smith, the angel was the guardian of the golden plates, which Latter Day Saints believe were the source material for the Book of Mormon, buried in a hill near Smith’s home in western New York. An important figure in the theology of the Latter Day Saint movement, Moroni is featured prominently in Mormon architecture and art. Besides Smith, the Three Witnesses and several other witnesses also reported that they saw Moroni in visions in 1829.

          Moroni is thought by Latter Day Saints to be the same person as a Book of Mormon prophet-warrior named Moroni, who was the last to write in the golden plates. The book states that Moroni buried them before he died after a great battle between two pre-Columbian civilizations. After he died, he became an angel who was tasked with guarding the golden plates and directing Smith to their location in the 1820s. According to Smith, he returned the golden plates to Moroni after they were translated and, as of 1838, Moroni still had the plates in his possession.[2]

          So didn’t God’s Word warns us not to fall from “updates” from angels? Islam claims to be updated by an angel also.

          But we got the Gospel from Jesus Christ.

          I am just reasoning along with God in the scriptures. So if I do my background checks into false religions and check their words, deeds and claims I can see they don’t match the Word of God but in fact run counter to it.

          • Bryan says:

            As much as I dislike Mormonism now Susan, you have got it dead wrong. Joseph Smith was not a Mason until a few years before his death. Read the following:
            “The Book of Mormon scribe and financier Martin Harris fought against what he saw as the evils of freemasonry. In October of 1827 Martin was elected to the anti-mason committee in Palmyra, New York. There is no doubt that as He read the pages of the Book of Mormon, he found many similarities to his fight against freemasonry. The Book of Mormon is filled with stories of the Gadianton robbers, their secret combinations, and God’s condemnation of their actions. In 1831 As one of the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon, Martin Harris even declared that the Book of Mormon was the “anti-masonic Bible.”
            So Smith was actually anti-masonic when he started Mormonism in 1830.

      • KR says:

        A Brother In Christ wrote: “Some of the most common ones is people don’t want to be held to any standard. They don’t want to leave the cares of the world. Some might have suffered something that they believe to be evidence against it .Some people just don’t actually look at the evidence, which clearly you do read.”
        In my experience, these are exceptions. I think you may have to accept the fact that a lot of people look at the evidence presented and just find it wanting. At this point, some Christians like Susan resort to name-calling, describing the skeptics as liars and evidence-deniers but this clearly isn’t going to help the Christian case.
        The thing is, if there were actual empirical evidence, the truth of Christianity would be a demonstrable fact. This is obviously not the case – if it were, there would be no need for faith. I think this is what I’ve always found a bit odd when it comes to apologetics – it’s an attempt to provide evidence for something that ultimately doesn’t rest on evidence.
        One of the most famous apologists, William Lane Craig, has stated that he knows Christianity is true based on the internal witness of the holy spirit and that this trumps any contrary evidence that’s presented to him. Clearly, his belief isn’t founded on evidence so why should anyone else’s belief be expected to? Furthermore, why should apologists like Dr Craig expect anyone else to be open to changing their mind based on the evidence when he’s clearly not?

        • KR says:

          Oh – and also a shout out to the person (I believe it was TGM) who taught me the trick using periods. Finally I can have paragraphs!

        • A brother in Christ says:

          First of all, yes certain rhetoric doesn’t really endear people to the Bible.
          Some people are open minded and actually seek. The majority of athiest that end up on this website are hostile. In my experience, a lot of people I’ve talked to have moral objections. (What does God have against sex? God is a tyrant. ) That’s not the only reason people object, but that a very common one. Just ask the people who write the articles on this site.
          There is empirical evidence for the faith, even if it’s not definitive, like a video or something. It comes in the form of ancient documents that corroborates the Bible. Some scientific evidences. Some internal evidence in the Bible itself. Archeological evidence. The rise and spread of Christianity across the globe.
          Dr Craig knows Christianity is true due to the Holy Spirit and that’s the best evidence. But he does believe the evidence and presents it very well.
          Apologetics is not really for our faith. It does reenforce faith. It comes from the Greek word apologia, means to give a reasoned defense. It’s usually used as a tool to make a case to the unbeliever. Its not really needed for faith though.
          Also, faith is not just a simple belief. Hebrews 11:1-2 says ” Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. For by it, the elders obtained a good report.”. The Greek word pistis, translated faith, is defined, faith, confidence, trust.

          • KR says:

            “In my experience, a lot of people I’ve talked to have moral objections. (What does God have against sex? God is a tyrant. )”


            Then the people you’re talking to aren’t atheists, since they’re apparently operating on the assumption that God exists. Atheism is the lack of belief in deities, remember? I maintain that people are atheists because they’ve found no compelling reason to believe in any god. Atheists will sometimes, for the sake of argument, accept the existence of a god in order to point out some inconsistency or logical fallacy – maybe that’s what has you confused?


            Concerning the evidence you allude to, we could discuss it but I don’t really see much point. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen most of it in some form or another and I find it completely unconvincing. Considering the fantastical nature of the claims, the absolute certitude with which the theists believe them and the life-altering consequences of these beliefs, I find the quality of the evidence shockingly poor. In the end, though, I think it’s important to point out that we don’t choose our beliefs – they are the result of factors beyond our control. I couldn’t make myself believe in God anymore than I could make myself believe 2+2=5.


            “Apologetics is not really for our faith. It does reenforce faith.”


            This is my impression, too. Apologetics seems to be more about reassuring people who already believe than about bringing in new believers. As for faith, it’s either based on evidence or it’s not – the latter seems to be the case. You can call it trust but the same thing still applies – either this trust is based on experience (i.e. it’s empirical) or it’s not.

  5. Susan says:

    Bryan, prove the Mormons didn’t receive a false gospel from an evil angel. Or make it up.

    Paul said it in Galatians. There is only one Gospel. Why does God need an angel to correct what He has already said. Does He lack foreknowledge?

    Paul already ruled out Islam and Mormonism a long time before they came to be in this world.

    People that don’t believe in God like to say which religion is true but God tells us in the Bible. No religion is true only belief in His Son.

    Islam and Mormonism and the Jehovah’s Witnesses all claim to be derivative works but how can they be if they contradict the Source?

  6. Bryan says:


    Yes Susan Smith made the whole thing up using his imagination and books like View of the Hebrews. Smith was a conman.

    But you said he was a freemason when he started it which is incorrect. He joined the Masons AFTER he founded Mormonism in 1842. I was active in the Mormon Church. Were you? I was a Mormon missionary for several years. Were you? I might know a bit more about Mormonism than you do.

    • Susan says:

      I didn’t give a date on when Smith joined freemasonry. I just know he is connected with it so that connects Mormonism to freemasonry.

      Anyone interested can research into it themselves.

    • Brad Nitzsche says:

      I grew up in the RLDS church. An offshoot of the Mormon church that disengaged from them on their way to Utah and set up their headquarters in Independence MO. As I got older, my love of science and history led me to become an agnostic. After marriage and settling down, I tried to move back into my earlier belief. My wife (a Christian) started questioning my Mormonistic beliefs leading me on a 2 year quest to prove her misgivings wrong. As a result of that search, I became a bible believeing Christian. My observations are that Mormonism just doesn’t stand up under scrutinity. Joseph Smith stole a manuscript from the home of a man named Solomon Spaulding based on people in the Americas and written in Elizabethan english, then used it with transliterations from the King James Bible to invent his new religion. As far as science goes, most of what is put forward as scientific fact is actually nothing more than the opinions and theories of those in certain fields. Like evolution, and how the universe works, it is just their theories, and has not been proven by observation or in the lab. No group or denomination has the market on salvation. All have to come to Christ as individuals, and none can come to Him unless the Father draws them (John 6:44). Christ did it all (our redemption and reconcilliation) and we cannot gain it by our own efforts or works (Ephesians 2 :8-10). Believing by faith in Christs death, burial, and RESURRECTION (1 Corinthians 15 :1-4) is what “borns” us into the family of God. People are going to believe what they want, and though we are to reach out to all we can, the sad truth is that the vast majority will reject God.

  7. Zyleyma Cruz says:

    I watched the apologetics series when I was emotionally unstable and dealing with doubt. I was not ready to hear about confrontational claims. After watching it, it made me feel even more sad. I don’t see the Bible the same anymore. This makes me feel even more conflicted. What should I do?

    • toby says:

      Don’t be sad. You’re looking at a glass half empty. Alter your perspective and see it as half full. Either you will thoroughly research these things and come to a new opinion that religion is false or you will find something that rids you of your doubts. But if you go into the search wanting a specific outcome, you’ll like find a way to rationalize it to the point that you confirm your bias. In that case it is not necessarily the case that you will find any sort of truth.


Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *