Tag Archive for: Practical Apologetics

Dialogue and Christian Apologetics: A Biblical-Theological Overview

Christian apologetics is often understood as the task of defending the faith—giving reasons why believing in Christ is rational, true, and worthy of commitment. Scripture itself urges believers to be “ready to give an answer” for the hope that is in them (1 Pet. 3:15). Yet the Bible presents this defense not merely as the delivery of arguments, but as something that takes place within dialogue: real conversations with real people. A biblical-theological view shows that dialogue is not a compromise of apologetics, but one of its essential forms.

The Pattern   

From the start, God’s revelation to humanity unfolds in a dialogical way. God speaks, humans respond; God questions, humans answer; God rebukes, invites, and restores. This pattern reaches its fullness in Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh. Jesus rarely preached at people in isolation. Instead, he engaged them—asking probing questions, responding to objections, and addressing the specific concerns of those before him. The conversation with the Samaritan woman (John 4) is a striking example: Jesus listens, challenges assumptions, reveals truth gradually, and calls for a response grounded in trust rather than mere argument.

The apostolic witness continues this pattern. The book of Acts repeatedly describes Paul as “reasoning” with others. In synagogues and marketplaces alike, he explained, argued, listened, and responded (Acts 17:2–4, 16–34). In Athens, Paul did not simply proclaim conclusions; he entered into dialogue with philosophers who asked him to clarify what he was teaching. Paul’s approach demonstrates that apologetics is not about winning debates, but about persuasion—patiently seeking understanding and presenting the gospel in terms his hearers could grasp.

This dialogical posture is reinforced in the epistles. Peter exhorts believers to give a defense with “gentleness and respect,” implying attentiveness to the person asking questions, not merely to the content of their objections (1 Pet. 3:15–16). Paul tells Timothy that the Lord’s servant must “not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone,” correcting opponents with gentleness in hope that God might grant repentance (2 Tim. 2:24–26). Such exhortations assume ongoing interaction, not one-sided proclamation.

Three Strengths of Apologetic Dialogue      

Dialogue strengthens apologetics in several important ways. First, it humanizes the task. Apologetics can easily become abstract or combative, especially when focused only on arguments. Dialogue insists that the apologist listen—truly listen—to the other person’s beliefs, experiences, and questions.[1] Many objections to Christianity are not merely intellectual puzzles but are bound up with personal wounds, moral struggles, or cultural assumptions. Dialogue allows apologetics to address people as whole persons made in God’s image.

Second, dialogue tests and refines Christian arguments. A belief defended only in theory may sound convincing until it meets real resistance. Genuine conversation exposes weaknesses, clarifies misunderstandings, and helps believers see where disagreement truly lies. In this sense, dialogue is an exercise in intellectual humility.[2] It does not require Christians to pretend neutrality or uncertainty about truth, but it does call them to examine their own assumptions in the light of Scripture and reason.

Third, dialogue has particular persuasive power in today’s cultural context. Many people are suspicious of authority and resistant to lectures. Dialogue, by contrast, signals respect. It communicates that Christianity is confident enough to engage questions honestly. This does not mean softening the exclusive claims of the gospel but presenting them in a relational way that demonstrates their coherence, beauty, and relevance to life.[3]

The Potential Dangers of Dialogue  

At the same time, dialogue presents real dangers if misunderstood. One risk is allowing dialogue to replace proclamation. Christianity makes truth claims about God, Christ, sin, and salvation. Dialogue that suspends these claims indefinitely or treats all viewpoints as equally true undermines the very purpose of apologetics.[4] Genuine dialogue presupposes that truth matters and that contradictory claims cannot all be correct.

Another danger is the loss of doctrinal clarity. In the desire to maintain conversation, believers may feel pressure to minimize distinctively Christian convictions. Scripture, however, calls believers both to contend for the faith (Jude 3) and to do so in love. Dialogue must therefore be guided by conviction as well as charity.

Finally, dialogue requires patience. It is often slow and seemingly unproductive. Conversations may take months—or years—without visible results.[5] Yet this patience reflects God’s own longsuffering with humanity. Apologetics shaped by dialogue trusts that God works through faithful witness over time, not merely through quick victories.

Dialogue and Apologetics Belong Together 

In the end, dialogue and apologetics belong together. Biblically understood, apologetics is not a choice between argument and conversation, but a commitment to speak truth within a relationship. Rooted in God’s own communicative action and modeled by Jesus and the apostles, dialogue enables believers to defend the faith with conviction, clarity, humility, and love. When practiced this way, apologetics becomes not only a defense of Christian truth, but a living testimony to the character of the God who invites the world to know him.

References:

[1] Mark Brumley, How Not to Share Your Faith: The Seven Deadly Sins of Apologetics and Evangelization (San Diego, CA: Catholic Answers, 2002), 106–107.

[2] Brumley, pp. 106–107.

[3] James Beilby, Thinking About Christian Apologetics: What It Is and Why We Do It (InterVarsity Press, 2011), p. 155.

[4] James Beilby, p. 155.

[5] Brumley, pp. 106-107.

Recommended Resources: 

I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Paperback), and (Sermon) by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek 

Was Jesus Intolerant? (DVD) and (Mp4 Download) by Dr. Frank Turek 

Jesus vs. The Culture by Dr. Frank Turek DVD, Mp4 Download, and Mp3

Reflecting Jesus into a Dark World by Dr. Frank Turek – DVD Complete Series, Video mp4 DOWNLOAD Complete Series, and mp3 audio DOWNLOAD Complete Series

 

Leo Percer grew up in Millington, Tennessee, northeast of Memphis, when he first received his call to teaching ministry. He has been involved in numerous ministerial activities, including serving as an elder at Forest Community Church in Forest, Virginia. Dr. Leo Percer graduated with a Ph.D. from Baylor University, an M.A. from Western Kentucky University, and M.Div. from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and a B.A. from Union University.

After graduating with his Ph.D., Dr. Percer has taught at Baylor University, McLennan Community College, and Liberty University, where he served as the Director of the Ph.D. in Theology and Apologetics program for years. His area of expertise is in Second Temple Judaism, the Epistles of Paul, and apocalyptic literature. Dr. Percer is an active member of the Evangelical Theological Society, the Society of Biblical Literature, and is on the board of directors at Ratio Christi. Dr. Percer resides in Lynchburg, VA, with his wonderful wife, Lisa, and two children. He loves reading, collecting comic books, and is a coffee connoisseur.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/4trIeGs

/by

Advice to Young Aspiring Apologists

David Wood recently posted an excellent video featuring a series of short interview clips with various apologists (Douglas Groothuis, Gary Habermas, Craig Hazen, Mike Licona, Nabeel Qureshi, Mary Jo Sharp, and Frank Turek) on advice to future apologists. As one who is of the younger generation myself (I am almost 27)[1], and who has been active in the public apologetics arena from relatively young (from around 20 years of age) I have some experience to speak of when it comes to being a young defender of the Christian faith.

In this article, I want to address those who are young, perhaps in their late teens or in their 20’s, and who aspire to do public work in apologetics. In particular, I want to reflect on my observations over the past six or seven years of involvement in apologetics and what lessons I have learned in the process — sometimes, unfortunately, the hard way.

Lesson 1: Be Careful How Early You Enter into the Public Arena    

It’s perfectly natural that, when you have a new idea, you want to share it with the world. Over the last decade or so, there has been an explosion in the popularity of online blogging, which has given people the ability to spread ideas and information quickly. This has its obvious advantages, but it also has some significant risk factors and draw-backs, especially for young people. Among these is the fact that what you publish publicly on the internet is effectively public material forever.

Why might that be a risk-factor for young people? When you’re young, your views and ideas are still in the process of crystallizing. Being less wedded to a given paradigm than those of the older generation means you are more likely to revise your position or change your mind on certain issues. I, for one, have seen an evolution in my own views and arguments over the past five years. Your arguments also become more refined and sophisticated over time as you learn from the experience of defending them and conversing with people who are better acquainted with a given field than you are. You also become increasingly better informed as you read more and more about a subject. Imagine the frustration, then, when someone Googles your name, and the first hit is to an article you wrote some four or five years ago, articulating views or argumentation which you would no longer defend. You may well have expressed your current views and better refined arguments elsewhere, but that is not necessarily the first thing people will see. Things you said years ago can come back to haunt you for years. So, exercise caution!

A second danger here is that some areas relating to apologetics present a particular risk factor when seeking employment in certain professions. For example, in the academic environment in which we currently find ourselves, being overtly public about your views on biological design may land you in seriously hot water when it comes to building a career in the field of biology. The modern formulation of Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection has become so entrenched in modern academia that people do not want to put their own careers in jeopardy by being associated with someone who has public affiliations to intelligent design. Similarly, as we have seen with increasing frequency, public criticism of same-sex marriage may land you in hot water in certain career paths.

My advice would thus be to give careful consideration to how early you enter into the public arena to express your views. Think about allowing them to crystallize first. Otherwise, a pseudonym or alias may be a relatively safe option.

Lesson 2: Never Cut Corners — Research Your Argument Thoroughly       

This should go without saying, but you would be surprised at the number of people who do not take the time to hunt down a primary source, relying instead on what other people have said about that primary source. This is a very bad habit. When you read a quotation in a book that has been taken from another source, try to avoid using it unless you can trace it to the primary source. If the quotation has been lifted out of context, or has been misinterpreted by the author, you are just as culpable if you do not check it for yourself. Always be ready with primary sources to back up points you make in debate. In addition, read the relevant sections of primary sources carefully. You would be amazed at the number of people who think they are engaged in good scholarship by basing their interpretation of a scientific research paper on its abstract, or even (far worse) its title! Never proof-text a passage of which you aren’t familiar with the context. Exercise great concern for factual accuracy. As Christians, we believe that Christ is ultimate truth itself (John 14:6). We are thus committed to a very high standard of accuracy and fair representation.

You should also be acquainted with the responses that have already been offered to the argument you are making. If you are making a new argument that hasn’t been addressed before, try to anticipate possible objections. Even better, get someone who takes a different view to read and critique your argument before going public with it. Friends can also be invaluable in critically appraising your work before it goes public.

Work to understand your argument well. Don’t just parrot an argument that you heard somebody else make.

Lesson 3: Strive to Understand the View You Are Criticizing Better Than Its Best Defenders       

You should always, at least in principle, strive to understand the view or argument you are criticizing better than its best defenders. There is nothing worse than an apologist who discredits the Gospel by making basic misrepresentations of a view, such as evolution or Islam, that could have been avoided with a little research. My advice here would be not to limit your reading to books that already agree with you. Be courageous and read books representing the other side of the debate as well. If you are critically appraising a religion, read that religion’s primary sources. Don’t get your information on Islam, for example, solely from Christian sources. Apart from being intellectually responsible, this also opens up doors and builds bridges to people of other worldview persuasions. My familiarity with the Qur’an and Hadith literature, for example, has opened up numerous opportunities to have dialogues with Muslims. People respect it when you can demonstrate that you have done your homework, and will be more inclined to listen to what you have to say.

Lesson 4: Be Honest About The Weaknesses of Your Position       

An argument is rendered far more credible and respectable when the person articulating and defending the position is willing to honestly state the position’s weaknesses upfront. This allows the intended audience to objectively evaluate the pros and cons of your position and come to their own conclusion about where the balance of evidence lies. Unfortunately, this is something we need to see more of in apologetics. All propositional claims have their share of both strengths and weaknesses — yes, even Christianity. The evidence may well be (as I maintain that it is) overwhelmingly in favour of Christianity being true, but there are always facts on the other side of the balance as well, which are worthy of consideration. We are all susceptible, at some level, to confirmation bias, and it is important that we take steps to minimize the impact of this bias on our public presentation of the arguments and evidence.

Lesson 5: Be Charitable         

Always look for the most charitable way of reading your sources. Give the benefit of the doubt wherever possible. Show that you can responsibly critique a position or argument even when presented in its strongest possible form. If a critic makes a mistake, don’t immediately blast him for lying or having deceptive or malicious intent. More often than not, they just made a mistake. Point it out. If they admit their mistake, commend them for it. If, on the other hand, someone has had a mistake pointed out to them repeatedly, yet they persist in stating the falsehood, I would be inclined to be less charitable. A common example of this is when Muslim apologists confidently claim, over and over again like a mantra, that the canon of the New Testament was determined in A.D. 325 at the council of Nicaea, a fiction that has been exposed time and time again (see my article here for what really went on at Nicaea).

Related to this, one should always seek to engage with the most respected and capable defenders of a given position. Richard Dawkins and other members of the ‘New Atheist’ community have often been criticized for criticizing the worst representatives of Christianity, and avoiding the best possible opposition. This is not a trait that you want to emulate. There is a time, of course, for critiquing poor defenders of a position, particularly if they are popular, so that the vacuousness of their argumentation may be exposed. It is unfortunate that the most popular apologists for atheism also happen to be the least intellectually sophisticated (e.g. Richard Dawkins, Peter Atkins, Sam Harris). Since these men are popular, they ought to be responded to. But your engagement shouldn’t be limited to them. Likewise, so many Muslims listen to Zakir Naik and Ahmed Deedat that their arguments must be responded to, even if they are very unsophisticated. But try to engage Islam’s more reflective apologists, such as Shabir Ally, as well. To quote Proverbs 26:4-5, “Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you yourself will be just like him. Answer a fool according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own eyes.”

Lesson 6: Be Consistent        

The application of double standards is the surest sign of a failed argument. It is always important to be intellectually consistent. Don’t, for instance, use an argument against another religion which would work equally well against Christianity. Apply standards consistently!

Even more important, ensure that your style of living is consistent with the message you are proclaiming. Ignatius of Antioch, the second century church father and disciple of the Apostle John, in his Epistle to the Ephesians (15), put it so well: “Indeed, it is better to keep quiet and be, than to make fluent professions and not be.”

Lesson 7: Be A Good Listener

Be prepared to listen carefully to people with whom you are conversing. Seek to understand where they are coming from. Don’t presume things about them based upon what you have read about their religion. Let them have their say whenever they wish to speak. Be wary of steam rollers, but be careful about not being one yourself. It is better to allow them to speak too much than too little. Respond to the position that they have articulated, not the position that you think they should adhere to. Try to keep them on point, however. If you’re debating about Scripture, ask them to stay within one passage and reach a verdict with you on that passage (or at least admit to not having thought it through before and ask for time to reflect on it) before moving on to another passage. I speak from experience when I say that this is particularly important in dialogues with Jehovah’s witnesses!

There is an additional reason why it is prudent to be a good listener. Just because you disagree with an individual does not mean that you have nothing to learn from them. Every individual has unique experience and ideas that you can learn from. Remain teachable, even from those with whom you vehemently disagree.

Lesson 8: Be Prepared to Admit Mistakes And When You Don’t Have An Answer

Everybody makes mistakes from time to time. When someone legitimately points out an error or mistake on your part, do not try to cover it up. Admit to it, noting that it was an honest mistake. If someone contends that you have erred and you are not convinced that they are right, promise to check your sources and get back to them on it. It takes a lot of grace and humility to admit the occasional error, but people will respect you for it, and you will have greater credibility. Just don’t make a habit of making mistakes!

It is also important to confess when you are unable to answer a question or challenge. Everybody’s knowledge is limited, and there is only so much you can have researched. There will come times, on occasion, when you are met with a challenge that you have never considered or encountered before. When that happens, do not attempt to ‘wing’ it. Instead, graciously admit that you haven’t yet encountered this point and promise to investigate it further.

Lesson 9: Never Repay Insult With Insult    

Ad hominem attacks, which are by nature leveled against an individual rather than an argument, have unfortunately become common, especially online, where people feel safe behind the anonymity of the internet. One should never repay insult with insult, however. Set a good example for how intellectual discourse ought to be done. Show the world how Christians conduct themselves in argument and debate. To quote Ignatius of Antioch’s Epistle to the Ephesians (10),

Meet their animosity with mildness, their high words with humility, and their abuse with your prayers. But stand firm against their errors, and if they grow violent, be gentle instead of wanting to pay them back in their own coin. Let us show by our forbearance that we are their brothers, and try to imitate the Lord by seeing which of us can put up with the most ill-usage or privation or contempt — so that in this way none of the devil’s noxious weeds may take root in you.

Did Christ retaliate against those that mocked and insulted Him? As 1 Peter 2:23 says, “When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly.” Follow the example of Polycarp of Smyrna. When the mounted policemen came to track him down and closed in on his whereabouts, he reportedly ordered at once that they be given all the food and drink they wanted. By doing this, to quote another Proverb, “you will heap burning coals on his head [i.e. make them feel guilty for the way they treated you] and the Lord will reward you.”

Lesson 10: Generally Don’t Be Confrontational In The University Setting 

My advice for youths has always been to not draw attention to themselves by being confrontational with their professors in their place of study. Granted, there is sometimes a time and place for challenging professors, but these opportune and appropriate times are not common. The reason you should not be confrontational is that you do not want to come across as portraying yourself as a peer. In a professor-student relationship, this comes across as rather arrogant.

Lesson 11: Be Above Public Reproach          

Personal integrity is so important, particularly for the Christian. Like it or not, as a public ambassador for the Christian faith, people are observing your life. Many of them are looking for things to find fault with. As a Christian apologist, there would be nothing worse than to have your reputation sullied by a momentary lapse in moral judgment. The life of the believer is the ultimate apologetic. If the way you live your life does not comport with the message you are proclaiming, people are going to think “This Christ has evidently not had much of an impact on his life? Why should I expect Christ to impact mine?” 2nd Clement 13:3-4 illustrates the point well:

For when outsiders hear the sayings of God from our mouths, they are astonished at their beauty and greatness. Then when they discover that our actions do not match our words, they turn from astonishment to blasphemy, saying that our faith is some kind of myth and error. For on the one hand, they hear from us that God has said, “It is no great accomplishment for you to love those who love you; it is great if you love your enemies and those who hate you.” And when they hear these things, they are astonished by their extraordinary goodness. But then when they see that we fail to love not only those who hate us, but even those who love us, they ridicule us and the name is blasphemed.

As Jesus said to his disciples in Matthew 10:16, “Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.”

Lesson 12: Your Academic Studies Must Take Priority        

It doesn’t matter how much you know. You are going to be very limited in what you can do as a public intellectual if you have no academic credentials to your name. Striking the right balance between academic study and other intellectual interests is hard, but the former must take priority.

If you adopt intelligent design (ID) theory as your view and this becomes known among the faculty in your department, this is of particular importance, since you are now an ambassador for this view. You don’t want to discredit the ID community by poor performance and you also don’t want to give any defensible justification to those who may want to penalize you for adopting such a view.

Lesson 13: Don’t Let Your Intellectual Endeavors Take Your Eyes Off Christ. Be Soaked in Scripture.

In his book The Doctrine of Repentance, the 17th century puritan Thomas Watson wrote,

Some bless themselves that they have a stock of knowledge, but what is knowledge good for without repentance? It is better to mortify one sin than to understand all mysteries. Impure speculatists do but resemble Satan transformed into an angel of light. Learning and a bad heart is like a fair face with a cancer in the breast. Knowledge without repentance will be but a torch to light men to hell.

It is of the utmost importance that Christ form the cornerstone of everything that you do. Take care to maintain a healthy prayer life and meditate daily upon the word of God. Remember that we are not saved by our adherence to a body of doctrine, nor our ability to articulate and defend the Christian faith. Continuously examine yourself to see whether the beliefs of your intellect reflect the beliefs of your heart, manifested by your actions. Be sure that you are not one of the ones to whom Christ will say “I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.”

Conclusion

The above are just a few of the principles that I have picked up through my own involvement in apologetics. Some of these I can relate to through my own experience. Others, I picked up from observing and learning from other people. If you commit to applying the above principles consistently, you cannot go far wrong.

References: 

[1] [Editor’s Note: This blog was originally posted August 1, 2016.]

Recommended Resources: 

Reflecting Jesus into a Dark World by Dr. Frank Turek – DVD Complete Series, Video mp4 DOWNLOAD Complete Series, and mp3 audio DOWNLOAD Complete Series

I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Paperback), and (Sermon) by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek 

When Reason Isn’t the Reason for Unbelief by Dr. Frank Turek DVD and Mp4

How Philosophy Can Help Your Theology by Richard Howe (DVD Set, Mp3, and Mp4)   

 

Dr. Jonathan McLatchie is a Christian writer, international speaker, and debater. He holds a Bachelor’s degree (with Honors) in forensic biology, a Masters’s (M.Res) degree in evolutionary biology, a second Master’s degree in medical and molecular bioscience, and a Ph.D. in evolutionary biology. Currently, he is an assistant professor of biology at Sattler College in Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. McLatchie is a contributor to various apologetics websites and is the founder of the Apologetics Academy (Apologetics-Academy.org), a ministry that seeks to equip and train Christians to persuasively defend the faith through regular online webinars, as well as assist Christians who are wrestling with doubts. Dr. McLatchie has participated in more than thirty moderated debates around the world with representatives of atheism, Islam, and other alternative worldview perspectives. He has spoken internationally in Europe, North America, and South Africa promoting an intelligent, reflective, and evidence-based Christian faith.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/4vMvqNk

/by

Why Your Atheist Friend Will Never Change His Mind (Unless…)

Ever feel like talking to your atheist friend about faith is like hitting your head against a brick wall? You’ve tried explaining, debating, carefully exegeting Bible verses, but they just don’t get it after repeated corrections. You’re starting to wonder if they ever will. Sound familiar? You’re probably thinking, “Why do they keep twisting what faith really means?” It’s like they’re stuck in this loop, misrepresenting faith as some blind leap without evidence. You’ve been patient, clear, and respectful, but nothing seems to change. It’s enough to make anyone want to throw their hands up and walk away.

 

But hang tight. There’s a reason for their stubbornness, and it’s not just about being argumentative. The truth is, atheists often fall into hidden fallacies that keep them from truly understanding faith. To be fair, it’s not their fault entirely.

But here’s the good news: knowing what these fallacies are can help you break through and bring clarity to your conversations. Ready to know why your atheist friend just can’t see eye to eye on faith? Let’s get started.

The Origin of Misconception: Where Did This Definition Comes From?

“We may define ‘faith’ as a firm belief in something for which there is no evidence. Where there is evidence, no one speaks of ‘faith.’ We do not speak of faith that two and two are four or that the earth is round. We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence. And the substitution of emotion for evidence is apt to lead to strife, since different groups substitute different emotions.”
Bertrand Russell. Human Society in Ethics and Politics (1954), Ch. VII: Can Religion Cure Our Troubles? p. 213

Here’s a fun fact: You know what your friend and Bertrand have in common? They both didn’t consult a theological or philosophical dictionary for this definition of faith. If your friend has a similar definition, “believing something without evidence or in spite of,” let’s challenge it with seven key points:

  1. The majority of people who define faith as believing something without evidence are popular atheists.
  2. Virtually no well-informed Christian holds this view.
  3. No ecumenical council has endorsed this definition.
  4. The vast majority of renowned theologians and philosophers, historically or currently, do not teach it.
  5. Atheists trained in philosophy don’t use this definition.
  6. No theological dictionary or encyclopedia defines the Christian faith this way.
  7. The etymological roots of the word “faith” don’t support this definition.

So, where does this definition come from? Certainly not from Christianity in general. Yet, many popular atheists assume that every religion shares this definition and paint all believers with the same broad brush.

Now, to be fair, there was (and still is with very few adherents) a school of thought called fideism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines fideism as:

“[I]n some sense independent of, if not outright adversarial toward, reason. In contrast to the more rationalistic tradition of natural theology, with its arguments for the existence of God, fideism holds – or at any rate appears to hold . . . that reason is unnecessary and inappropriate for the exercise and justification of religious belief.”

One of the famous church fathers who is said to be a fideist was Tertullian. Per the article, there’s currently just a handful of Christian philosophers who are trying to (re)habilitate the position, like C. Stephen Evans, John Bishop, and Duncan Pritchard. I bet that your atheist friend doesn’t know them by name, much less their work. Even if they do know these philosophers and their work, to take this minority, minimally influential position and show it to others as the main position in Christianity is not honest.

No matter where these atheists took this definition, the best way to go is to research what is the most well-held and robust definition used by the religion and then critique it fairly. Now, here’s the twist: If faith is believing something is true without any evidence or in spite of evidence, then what is the evidence that faith is believing without evidence or in spite of it?

If your atheist friend doesn’t have evidence for this definition, then by his own logic, he’s taking it on faith. Many atheists are unaware of this self-defeating aspect of their definition. For some, showing this self-defeating outcome will be enough to change their minds. But others are more stubborn.

How Atheists Turns Faith into a Punching Bag

Atheists often trip over the strawman fallacy when discussing faith. They misrepresent it (knowingly or unknowingly), making it seem weaker than it actually is. They beat up faith like a punching bag with adjectives like irrational, illogical, unreasonable, and even immoral.

This is where the frustration kicks in for Christians. You’ve likely thought, “That’s not what faith is at all!”Christian faith is not about blind belief. The Bible defines faith as “confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see” (Hebrews 11:1). Key words here are “confidence” and “assurance”.

J. Warner Wallace gives a great insight into faith in his commentary about Hebrews 11.1.

“Is the author saying, ‘Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, when the evidence is unseen?’ No, he’s saying just the opposite. When considering chapter 10 prior to interpreting verse 11:1, it’s clear that the author is encouraging his readers to endure those times when God seems absent; those times when trials and tribulations cause us to question God’s existence. Where is God in these difficult situations? Why can’t we see Him? Why can’t we see His activity in our lives? In verse 11:1, the author of Hebrews says that we can trust that God’s salvation, protection and provision are still there for us, even though they may appear to be ‘things not seen.’ In spite of their apparent absence, we are told to trust that they exist. Why? On what basis? On the basis of what we can see.’”

It’s about trust, grounded in reason and experience, even when we can’t see everything clearly. Imagine trusting you father to catch you in a trust fall. You believe they’ll catch you not because you’ve closed your eyes to reality, but because you’ve seen them do it before. You’ve experienced his reliability. This is exactly what the Christian believes when they speak about faith.

Think about historical evidence, philosophical arguments, scientific evidence, personal experiences that underpin Christian faith.

  • Historical Evidence: Like the reliability of the Bible, or the historical accounts of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection, gives us a foundation.
  • Philosophical Arguments: Such as the cosmological argument or the moral argument, provide rational support.
  • Scientific Arguments: Such as the teleological argument, providing scientific support from astrophysics and biology.
  • Personal Experiences: Like answered prayers or moments of peace and guidance in extreme persecution or dangerous situations, reinforce this trust.

So, when atheists dismiss faith as irrational or baseless, they’re attacking a strawman. They’re not engaging with the real, robust concept of faith that Christians hold. This misrepresentation feels like you’re speaking different languages. But this isn’t the only fallacy atheists fall into. There’s another subtle yet pervasive error that compounds the misunderstanding.

Demanding the Impossible: Why Atheists’ Requests for Material Proof Fall Flat

Here’s the other stumbling block: the category mistake. The word “evidence” in their definition is a very specific kind of evidence. Atheists often demand material evidence for a non-material entity like God. They want physical proof, something they can see, touch, or measure. But this demand is like asking for the weight of love. It just doesn’t fit.

We all accept many non-material realities without physical evidence. Think about love, justice, numbers, the reality of the past or consciousness. You can’t weigh these things or capture them in a test tube, yet they’re undeniably real and impactful. Similarly, God, as a non-material being, doesn’t conform to the constraints of the physical realm. Different types of evidence support different kinds of realities.

  • Empirical Evidence: Works great for physical phenomena. You can see gravity’s effects, measure it, and predict it.
  • Philosophical Arguments: Can demonstrate the necessity of a first cause, the existence of objective moral values, or the existence of abstract objects (like forms and numbers).
  • Historical Evidence: Like the resurrection of Jesus, can be scrutinized and debated but remains rooted in strongly reliable circumstantial case.
  • Experiential Evidence: Personal encounters and transformations provide a compelling, if subjective, form of proof.

Yet, atheists often miss this distinction. They insist on material evidence, not realizing they’re committing a category mistake. That’s like asking for proof of a sound’s color. The category doesn’t apply. This narrow view limits their understanding, keeping them stuck in a loop of disbelief.

Locked in Their Own World: How Atheists’ Limited View Blocks Real Understanding

Now, let’s talk about the personal incredulity fallacy. This one’s a biggie. If your friend’s worldview is materialism, naturalism, or even scientism, his worldview won’t leave room for anything beyond the physical, the material, the natural, or the scientific. It’s like trying to explain a smartphone to someone who’s only communicated through a keyer (the code morse machine). They just can’t wrap their heads around it.

This incredulity stems from a strict ontology of the world (what makes the world be like it is), like naturalism, or a strict epistemology of knowledge (how knowledge is acquired), like scientism. If something can’t be explained by the laws of nature, measured, or observed in a lab, it’s dismissed.

But think about the vastness of our universe, the complexity of human consciousness, the depth of love and morality. Not everything that’s real fits neatly into the scientific method or under a microscope.

Here’s where the frustration really ramps up. You’re explaining faith, using philosophical reasoning, historical proofs, scientific evidence, and personal experience. Yet, your atheist friend keeps shaking their head, saying, “I just can’t see it. If there’s evidence, there’s no need for faith. You can’t call that faith.”

It’s like they’ve put up a wall, and no amount of reasonable arguments will make a hole. This fallacy blocks openness to other ways of knowing. In science, we trust empirical evidence. In history, we rely on documented events and testimonies. In philosophy, we use logical reasoning. And in personal life, we trust experiences and relationships. Each of these ways of knowing offers a different lens. When atheists cling only to empirical evidence, they miss out on the fuller picture.

Think about it like this: You wouldn’t use a thermometer to measure happiness, right? Similarly, insisting on material evidence for everything limits understanding. Personal incredulity keeps the door shut to knowledge and experience that faith draws upon. When your arguments don’t seem to make a dent, it’s time to try a different approach.

Still Unconvinced? Here’s What to Do When Arguments Hit a Wall

So, what do you do when all this falls on deaf ears? When, despite your best efforts, your atheist friend still won’t budge? Here’s where patience come into play. It’s frustrating, sure. But it’s also an opportunity to reflect Christ’s love and patience.

  • Recognize the Limits: Not every conversation will lead to a grand epiphany. And that’s okay. Sometimes, it’s enough to plant a seed, to offer a perspective they hadn’t considered before. It’s about the long game, not quick wins.
  • Continue the Relationship: Keep the dialogue open. Respect their views, even if they don’t respect yours. Show that you value them as a person, not just as a potential convert. Your actions, your love, and your patience can speak volumes. Often, it’s these quiet, consistent demonstrations of faith that make the biggest impact over time.
  • Pray for Them: This isn’t about manipulation. It’s about genuinely seeking their good, asking for God’s guidance and wisdom in your interactions. Trust that the Holy Spirit works in ways we can’t always see or understand. Sometimes, the most powerful conversations happen when we step back and let God do His work.
  • Reflect on Your Own Journey: Recall how long it took you to recognize your error and your need for a Lord and Savior. Show some grace. Remember that faith isn’t just about convincing others through argumentation; it’s about living out your beliefs authentically and joyfully. Be the kind of person whose life reflects the love, hope, and peace of Christ. This witness, more than any argument, can draw others to consider faith in a new light.

In the end, it’s about more than just winning debates. It’s about building bridges, fostering understanding, and showing the love of Christ in every interaction. Your atheist friend might not change their mind overnight—or ever. But your faithful witness and loving presence can make a difference in ways you might never fully see. And that’s a God honoring mission worth pursuing.

Wrapping Up: Keeping the Faith in Every Conversation

It’s tough. I know. Especially when your friend is someone you sincerely and genuinely love. You’ve been there—spending hours, maybe even years, trying to explain faith to your atheist friend, only to be met with skepticism or outright dismissal. It feels like you’re running in circles, repeating the same arguments, and still hitting a wall. Discouraging, right?

You’re not alone. So many Christians are in the same boat, feeling that sting of misunderstanding. You’re pouring out your heart, trying to share something deeply personal and important, and it feels like it’s falling on deaf ears. You might be thinking, “Why even bother? Is it worth all this effort?”

Absolutely, it is. Every conversation, every patient explanation, is a seed planted. The insights from this article equip you with the understanding of those hidden fallacies that trip up your atheist friends. You now know why they misunderstand faith and how to steer the conversation towards clarity.

Think about it—understanding the strawman fallacy, the categorical error, and the personal incredulity trap puts you miles ahead. It gives you the tools to navigate these tricky waters with grace and wisdom. But here’s the kicker: It’s not just about winning debates or changing minds. It’s about embodying the love and patience of Christ. It’s about showing that even when the conversation hits a wall, your love and respect for your friend remain unshaken.

That’s powerful. That’s transformative. Remember, you’re not alone in this journey. Many have walked this path and found that persistence, patience, and prayer can work wonders. So, take heart! Each interaction, no matter how small, is a step forward. Your steadfastness and faithfulness are not in vain. So, go out there and keep those conversations going. Keep planting those seeds. Let your faith shine through your words and actions. And trust that, in time, even the hardest hearts can soften. Keep the faith, stay strong, and let God do His thing. You are making a difference, one conversation at a time.

Recommended Resources:

I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Paperback), and (Sermon) by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek 

Stealing From God by Dr. Frank Turek (Book, 10-Part DVD Set, STUDENT Study Guide, TEACHER Study Guide)

Macro Evolution? I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be a Darwinist (DVD Set), (MP3 Set) and (mp4 Download Set) by Dr. Frank Turek

Debate: Does God Exist? Turek vs. Hitchens (DVD), (mp4 Download) (MP3)

 

Miguel Rodriguez is the founder of Smart Faith, a platform dedicated to helping Christians defend their faith with clarity and confidence. After experiencing a miraculous healing at 14, he developed a passion for knowing God through study and teaching. He now serves as the Director of Christian Education and a Bible teacher at his local church while also working as a freelance email marketer. Living in Orlando, Florida, with his wife and two daughters, Miguel seeks to equip believers with practical and intellectual tools to strengthen their faith. Through Smart Faith, he provides apologetics and self-improvement content to help Christians live with wisdom and integrity.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/4krU0fD

/by

Countercultural Warriors…

An Age of Mirrors

Ours is an age of mirrors. Addicted to the thought of self, individuals of profound dignity and worth huddle together en masse as they shuffle along the broad road that leads them anywhere but towards life. The sides of the road are lined with mirrors, reflections of this act or that moment or those days. Deceptively effective, the mirrors keep the eyes of the people on themselves as they desperately seek to find deeper meaning in rituals and events made shallow by selfishness. The mirrors control the persons, reducing them to spectators of their own existence. Always primping, endlessly posturing, carefully portraying what they believe is the best face for others to see, the faces in the mirrors present a staged collage of a life that is more prop than substance, more acting than living.

 

Divine Purpose

The woman of God comes into this teeming gaggle of confused souls and, simply by not looking at her mirror but choosing, rather, to look at her Savior, becomes the means to helping others look away from themselves to find themselves. The man of God stands amid this cadre of insecure masculinity and, with a turn of his gaze away from an image that is not real toward the One in whose image he is made, leads others to see their worth in the maker of heaven and earth. This is the countercultural warrior that God calls each of us to be, women and men of God whose eyes are on eternity and whose hearts are filled with divine purpose—showing the world that they can look away from the mirrors and behold the God who is love. Only then will they find the meaning for which they so desperately long.

Hearing the Call

The call of the countercultural warriors sounds forth in the words of Jesus: “Love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength” and “love your neighbor as yourself” (Mark 12:30-31 NKJV). In a beautiful twist of holy irony, the countercultural warriors give themselves fully and without reservation—heart, soul, mind, and strength—to another. To the One and those made in His image. There is no room for self in the complete surrender and devotion of self to God and neighbor. As the Spirit’s refining fire burns ever brighter, the dross of selfishness is consumed as the holy coals of God-exalting selflessness glow white hot within the joyful wake of self-denial and sacrificial devotion.

Embodying Divine Love

It is only when such countercultural warriors arise in humble obedience that the world’s self-destructive inward bent and its vanity disguised as virtue are outed as the soul destroying lies that they are. It is only when countercultural warriors seek to embody divine love—with the courageous hearts of the meek and a towel girded waste with pitcher and bowl deployed in washing the feet of another—only then will they walk in the calling issued forth from the crucified Savior, the risen Lord, the coming King.

Will You Accept His Call?

Will you look away from the mirrors and look up in faith to the only One in whom is life? Will you close your ears to the siren call of selfishness that leads to making shipwreck of life, heeding instead the call of Jesus to find your life by losing it? Will you step into the fray of cultural chaos and become the countercultural warrior God calls you to be?

Recommended Resources:

Is Morality Absolute or Relative? by Frank Turek (Mp3/ Mp4)

Was Jesus Intolerant? (DVD) and (Mp4 Download) by Dr. Frank Turek 

Jesus vs. The Culture by Dr. Frank Turek DVD, Mp4 Download, and Mp3

Can All Religions Be True? mp3 by Frank Turek

 

T.J. Gentry, D.Min., Ph.D.: Senior Executive Vice President, Assistant Editor, Publisher, and Contributor serves as the Senior Pastor of First Christian Church of West Frankfort, Illinois, the Assistant Vice President of Publishing and Communications, and the Assistant Editor of Bellator Christi Ministries. He formerly served as the Executive Editor of MoralApologetics.com. Dr. Gentry earned his Ph.D. in Theology and Apologetics (Liberty University); Ph.D. in Theology with Missiology (North-West University, South Africa); and Ph.D. in Biblical Studies, Ph.D. in Leadership, and D.Min. in Pastoral Counseling (Carolina University). Additionally, he is the President of Illative House Press (illativehousepress.com), having previously published Pulpit Apologist: The Vital Link between Preaching and Apologetics(Wipf and Stock, 2020) and Absent from the Body, Present with the Lord: Biblical, Theological, and Rational Arguments against Purgatory(Wipf and Stock, 2019).

Dr. Gentry proudly served his country, both enlisted and officer, in the United States Army Chaplain Corps, and he has taught martial arts as a Christian ministry platform since the late 1990s. He is an adjunct professor at Carolina University (carolinau.edu) and Carolina College of Biblical Studies (https://ccbs.edu). He and his wife are blessed with five children and two grandchildren. His daily Bible teaching and devotions can be heard at tjgentry.net.

Originally posted at: https://bit.ly/3FlqbPz

/by

Here Comes the He Gets Us Campaign Again: Why Its Portrayal of Jesus is Still a Problem

,

Last year, I wrote an article called “7 Problems with the He Gets Us Campaign,” in which I critically responded to the $100 million advertising campaign featuring a website, billboards in major cities, a book, and ads that have been viewed more than 300 million times. Perhaps most visibly, the campaign’s ads were featured in last year’s Super Bowl. When thousands of people went searching for more information on it, my article came up, and it went viral—actually pulling down my site at one point! Clearly, a lot of people are interested in knowing more about the nature of these ads.

Fast forward to 2024. Super Bowl Sunday was on February 11. And He Gets Us once again ran ads generating widespread curiosity. Given the reach of the campaign and high interest level, I wanted to do an updated evaluation of what He Gets Us is doing today. To that end, I’m going to answer four questions:

  1. Does the He Gets Us Campaign get skeptics interested in Jesus?
  2. Does the He Gets Us Campaign get skeptics interested in the rightJesus?
  3. Do the He Gets Us campaign reading plans take people to the next level of understanding Jesus (beyond the slick website and TV ads)?
  4. Does the He Gets Us campaign direct people to theologically solid churches for continuing their search for truth?

There are three things that will inform my answers. First is my professional background in marketing (I have an MBA in marketing and am a former adjunct marketing professor). Since this is a campaign aimed at “marketing” Jesus, that background is particularly relevant. Second is my evaluation of the publicly available He Gets Us content (the website and YouVersion reading plans). I have not read the He Gets Us book, so that isn’t part of what I’m responding to. Third is a recent interview campaign consultant Ed Stetzer did with Biola professors Scott Rae and Sean McDowell on Biola’s “Think Biblically” podcast (Stetzer is the Dean of Biola’s Talbot School of Theology). While Stetzer says he is not a spokesman for the campaign, he has been closely involved, so his comments are helpful for an insider view of the goals and strategies.

1. Does the He Gets Us Campaign get skeptics interested in Jesus?

Stetzer says that the people who eventually started the campaign had become concerned “that the perception of Christianity had suffered and people weren’t necessarily considering who Jesus was. And they would like for people to consider who he was, who he is.” They then brought in market researchers who found that skeptics were open to considering who Jesus was (I’d love to know more about that, but no further information was noted). Stetzer emphasized repeatedly in the interview that the very narrow goal of the campaign is to reach those skeptics. Ultimately, He Gets Us wants to build a bridge from people seeing the ads to learning more by going to the website and ultimately signing up for a Bible reading plan and/or asking to be connected to a church.

So, in short, the goal is very specifically to get skeptics interested in Jesus. That’s a very worthy goal, especially if you have millions of dollars to do it with. My first question is, does the campaign successfully meet that objective?

While I don’t know the statistics on how many people have visited the He Gets Us website as a result of the ads, Stetzer says over 600,000 people have signed up for the reading plans and “hundreds of thousands” have been referred to churches. So, as a surface-level answer to the question, it certainly seems reasonable to say that yes, the campaign has generated interest. If the goal was to get people to one of those two action points—signing up for the Bible reading plan and/or asking for a church referral—then marketers have achieved at least some success. (Whether the numbers justify the money spent is a different question that I’m not evaluating here.)

2. Does the He Gets Us Campaign get skeptics interested in the right Jesus?

From a marketing perspective, there is a predictable funnel that people go through before taking action (e.g., making a purchase). It starts with becoming awareof something, which then sometimes converts to interest, which then sometimes converts to desire for action, which then sometimes converts to action. Marketers know that if you want people to take action—to get to the bottom of the funnel—you have to first take them through those stages, and those stages have to be tailored toward the action you want.

In this case, if you are marketing in order to generate interest in Jesus, you want to be sure you’re generating interest in the right Jesus (a correct portrayal) if you want that to lead to the action you desire. This is where I believe the campaign fails in a serious way.

As I said in last year’s article, the Jesus of this campaign is nothing more than an inspiring human who relates to our problems and cares a whole lot about a culturally palatable version of social justice (the exception to this is in parts of the reading plan, which I’ll address in the next point). This has not changed since I last wrote. My points then remain true now: The fact that Jesus “gets us,” stripped from the context of His identity, is meaningless; Jesus is presented as an example, not a Savior; The campaign reinforces the problematic idea that Jesus’s followers have Jesus all wrong; And the campaign reinforces what culture wants to believe about Jesus while leaving out what culture doesn’t want to believe. I won’t expand on these points here since you can read my prior article for that analysis.

But I do want to say more this time about who the campaign is clearly targeting. Stetzer mentioned that it’s “skeptics,” but a close evaluation (or even not so close evaluation) of the campaign makes it clear it’s not all skeptics they have in mind. This is crucial to understand. It’s a very specific segment of skeptics—it’s progressives who primarily view the world through a lens of social justice (and specifically the critical theory model of social justice, which places everyone in oppressor/oppressed buckets).

5 Signs Your Church Might Be Heading Toward Progressive Christianity

If you’ve never immersed yourself in the world of this viewpoint, you might not recognize how laden the content is with language and framing designed to appeal very specifically to this group. If they were targeting just any skeptic, you wouldn’t see such a specific framing of Jesus in progressive terminology; there are plenty of skeptics who aren’t beholden to progressive social justice thinking.

For example, they use hashtags with words that have a specific connotation to a progressive audience, even if the campaign isn’t necessarily using them in the same way (on the home page, you see #inclusive #activist #struggle #refugee #justice #outrage #bias #judgment). They also frame their content in terms that are commonly used in progressive social critiques. For example, the words “religious leaders” or “religious people” are often used with a negative connotation, which serves to reinforce the notion that it’s bad to be “religious.” That was never Jesus’s claim (see my podcast with Alisa Childers). There are recurring references to concepts like lived experience, power dynamics, oppression, racial conflict, toxic systems, corruption, and political conflict—all progressive focal points. That’s not to say that none of these things are actually problems, but rather that it’s clear they’re focusing on progressives given their obvious focus on progressive concerns.

So why is this a concern? I have no concern at all with choosing progressives as your target audience. But I have a lot of concern with the nature of the campaign given this target and what they are likely to take from it. Here are three key reasons why.

First, the campaign will likely lead many progressives to conclude that they (still) like Jesus and (still) hate Christians. To be honest, I’m not very convinced that we even have a problem with Jesus’s reputation in culture. People tend to like Jesus because they don’t understand all that He taught. As far as the average person is concerned, Jesus was a loving guy who hated “the system” and can serve as a good moral example—and that’s exactly how the He Gets Us website portrays Him. People, however, tend to have disdain for Christians when we present the fullness of what the Bible teaches, particularly on moral subjects. So, if a progressive sees this content and never gets to a Bible reading plan or church connection, they’ve taken away that Jesus was the great guy they thought He was and that all those Christians today who talk about things they don’t like are still the problem.

Second, the campaign will solidify the idea in progressives’s minds that their social justice lens of the world is the lens through which Jesus sees it, too. It would be one thing if marketers used progressive language to present a full picture of Jesus. But when you just use progressive language without presenting the full picture, it leaves the impression that their language—representing a whole underlying worldview structure built on critical theory—is correct. Those who don’t get to the desired Bible or church action points will simply come away thinking that Jesus was a social justice warrior just like they are (with all that implies to them).

It would be one thing if marketers used progressive language to present a full picture of Jesus. But when you just use progressive language without presenting the full picture, it leaves the impression that [Progressive Christianity] is correct.

Is that really a big problem? Yes, yes it is. It is this model of oppressed/oppressor thinking that leads progressives to claim the gender binary is oppressive, that white people are inherently racist, that abortion is a form of justice for women, that heterosexuality is an oppressive norm, and that we need to abolish the nuclear family. If this campaign even inadvertently suggests through a social justice veneer that this is the lens through which Jesus would have seen the world, that is a disastrous consequence.

It is this model of oppressed/oppressor thinking that leads progressives to claim the gender binary is oppressive, that white people are inherently racist, that abortion is a form of justice for women, that heterosexuality is an oppressive norm, and that we need to abolish the nuclear family

Third, the campaign can easily be construed to affirm theologically progressive Christianity. In my last two points, I was speaking specifically of progressives who don’t identify as Christians. There are, however, many who hold to the same social justice ideology and do identify as Christians. They are typically focused on a human Jesus who merely cares about a social gospel, and they reject the authority of the Bible. These Christians would heartily affirm everything on the He Gets Us site. Given that the site portrays a fully human Jesus and at the same time claims to be presented by “Christians,” there’s no reason to think someone wouldn’t come away thinking they can be a Christian and not believe all the “baggage” about things like the Bible being God’s Word.

It’s worth noting this statement on the site: “He Gets Us is a diverse group of Jesus followers with a wide variety of faith journeys and lived experiences. Our work represents the input from Christians who believe that Jesus is the son of God.” All of this looks good so far. But they continue saying, “as well as many others who, though not Christians, share a deep admiration for the man that Jesus was, and we are deeply inspired and curious to explore his story.” It’s pretty clear theologically progressive Christians, who deny the deity of Christ, have been part of the team.

So, my answer to the question, “Does the He Gets Us Campaign get skeptics interested in the right Jesus?” is a resounding no. It’s not just an incomplete picture of Jesus. It’s an inaccurate one. And because it will just confirm what the target audience already thinks, many if not most will jump out of the marketing funnel before they get to the desire to learn more. If you don’t challenge people’s thinking, what would they need to learn more about?

3. Do the He Gets Us campaign reading plans take people to the next level of understanding Jesus (beyond the slick website and TV ads)?

While I clearly have significant concerns about the people who imbibe ideas about Jesus and Christians from the He Gets Us web and TV content alone—never getting to the Bible or a church from this campaign—what about those who do actually get to the Bible reading plans? Are they designed well to take people to the next level of understanding—to an accurate one?

There are 7 plans on YouVersion, ranging from 4 to 9 days of content. I read all 43 days of the plans. If you’re interested in the details, I’ve documented below. If not, you can jump to the bottom line after I list the plans.

Plan 1: “He Gets Us” (7 days)
This plan continues the model of using progressive language and framing. The devotionals make comments like these:

  • “[Jesus’s enemies] feared him because he challenged the norm.” In progressive contexts, norms are typically seen as bad and need to be overturned.
  • “The way Jesus called out the toxic religious and political systems turned history upside down.” In progressive contexts, religion—especially Christianity—is toxic, as are political systems, so this makes Jesus appear to favor that view.
  • “[Jesus] made friends with people just as they are and let himself be known just as he was, too. Authentic. Trust-worthy. The kind of friend we all long for.” It’s true that Jesus made friends with people as they are, but most progressives are likely to read this as, “Jesus accepts you for whoever you want to be, so be your authentic self.” That’s not what it says, but if you have cultural awareness of the claims and debates today, it’s fairly obvious that’s something progressives would take from it without realizing the distinction between being friends with someone and approving of their identity/behavior.
  • “The Samaritan stopped and cared for the Jew, at his own expense just like he would a neighbor—unlike the racist, religious men who stepped over the beat-up guy on their way to worship, of all things.” Again, this plays into the progressive hatred for the “religious”; yes, the men were religious, but that wasn’t the problem. Jesus never scolded people for being too religious; He scolded them for being self-righteous and hypocritical.
  • “Yes, it’s true. The one who stood bravely against the strongest, most corrupt system of the day, was on his face in fear.” And yet again, this plays into the progressive view of systems being inherently corrupt.

In short, plan 1 is more of the same from the ad/web campaign and, far from redeeming the nature of that content, simply doubles down on the equivocation and misunderstandings.

Plan 2: “Diving Deeper” (7 days)
I thought that, given the title, this is where we would get deeper into a theologically accurate portrayal and reading of Jesus, but that’s not what I found. This one had fewer problematic statements than plan 1, but the content overall gets no closer to teaching people about the true Jesus (while continuing with occasional progressive framing along the way, such as casting Jesus’s infant trip to Egypt as a “refugee” situation).

On day 1, it says, “The best way to discover his actual purpose, regardless of the centuries between us, is to look at his life. Sure, plenty of books have been written about what he taught, but let’s look at his private side, the side you see when you walk with someone side by side down a new road.” The subsequent days go on to have subjects like “He grieves with us,” “He understands us,” “He’s vulnerable like us,” “He loves us,” “He faced hardship like us,” and “He is for us.” Do the actions leading to these statements really reveal Jesus’s “actual purpose” as indicated on day 1? Jesus’s purpose was to give His life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45). But to understand that would require an understanding of the nature of God, the nature of man, the divine nature of Jesus, and the problem of sin—none of which He Gets Us had addressed by this point. Instead, they offer people yet again more confirmation that Jesus simply gets us.

Plan 3: “Questions Jesus Asked” (7 days)
This plan seems disconnected from the other plans, rather than being on some kind of trajectory like “digging even deeper.” It features a set of questions Jesus asked people, with answers showing His character (no, still not his divine nature). There’s again a dig at “religious leaders” saying, “The cancel campaign began in Jerusalem where the jealous, paranoid religious leaders set a plot in motion to kill Jesus and they wouldn’t quit until he hung dead on a cross.”

Notably, this is the first plan where the verses themselves start referring to Jesus as something more than a human (John 6:66-69). It’s also the first time the devotional content casually references Jesus doing something supernatural (day 5 talks about Him walking on water). There is, however, zero explanatory transition from human Jesus to Jesus as God here. Someone who didn’t know that the Bible teaches Jesus is God could be forgiven for scratching their heads at how this human was now walking on water!

Despite this strange jump, I thought they were going to bring home the good news when they said, “But Jesus offers love, not because we measure up, but because of who he is. On that day, She chose to believe Jesus was who he said he was.” And, somewhat inexplicably, they don’t go on to say who Jesus said He was. Not only that, but they don’t get to it until the plan after the next one.

Plan 4: “Who Did Jesus Love?” (9 days)
Plans 4 and 5 are so different from everything else in the He Gets Us campaign that it seems like they hired a committed Christian to insert this content to make the well-meaning funders (who want people to know about the true Jesus) happy. I realize that sounds cynical, but it’s a jarring difference.

In plan 4, we read verses where Jesus is proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom and healing every disease—a clearly supernatural Jesus. Day 2 says, “The person we despise, he loved. And not for anything they did to deserve it but because of who he was,” and that comes with verses about salvation and how the Son of Man came to seek and save the lost. We read that Mary knew Jesus’s birth was far from “natural.” We see a doubting Thomas who wanted to personally experience the fact that Jesus was raised from the dead. And we read the gospel in John 3:16.

So, if people see an ad, go to the site, sign up for a Bible reading plan and make it to plan 4, they will find a supernatural Savior. (Granted, you could theoretically start with plan 4, but I’m guessing most people start with plan 1.)

Plan 5: “Who Did Jesus Say He Was?” (9 days)
This is the plan that really brings home what they should have been bringing home all along. Day 1 says, “Not only does he get us. He wants us to get him.” Yes! At long last, they make this connection. They go on to teach the full Jesus in this plan. Again, it’s so different in nature and even in language, that it really feels like they brought in someone to insert the “theological” content after the progressive Christians on staff developed everything else. Day 7 in particular brings the whole message home, laying out the Gospel and exclusivity of Jesus, and encourages people to pray.

Plan 6: “Jesus & Joy” (4 days)
This is a short plan focused on the subject of joy. There’s little here of interest other than another passing criticism of religious leaders (“Religious guys seemed to love following Jesus around town. Could you imagine being the popular guy in a town that stirred up the kind of noise that very religious people hated? That was Jesus”).

Plan 7: “What Jesus Gave Up” (6 days)
This one focuses on how Jesus was “after a different way of living.” Unfortunately, the plan reverts to a primarily human Jesus. For example, it lists four ways Jesus spent His life on earth and changed history: Jesus taught another way, He served, He forgave (the description of this only includes his human forgiveness of others, not His divine forgiveness), and He loved. It leaves out the most important reason why He changed history—He was God incarnate. On the final day, titled, “He Gave Up Vengeance,” it says, “The reality of what was happening was not lost on him. And nothing about it surprised him. Jesus was determined to accomplish what he came to do. And he did.” That’s the end, with no explanation about what He accomplished. (To be clear, they explained that in plan 5, but the plans seem to be written independently of one another, so a reader wouldn’t necessarily have been through plan 5 to know what they’re talking about.)

So, the bottom line is that the plans range from problematic (more social justice framing) to some basic Bible content (e.g., on joy) to some actual theological meat on what was left out of everything else on who Jesus is (plans 4 and 5). If someone actually makes it to plans 4 and 5, they’ll hear the gospel.

4. Does the He Gets Us campaign direct people to theologically solid churches for continuing their search for truth?

When people become interested in learning more about Jesus, they’re directed to a “Connect” page. One of my most significant concerns with the campaign last year was that there was no clear theological vetting of churches to which people were being sent. I do not see any updates or information on the current site as to the criteria they’re using to select church prospects.

[Editor’s Note] On the “Connect Locally” page, people are invited to join a local Alpha Course Small Group where they can discuss their questions in a church-based small-group setting.

As I explain in Faithfully Different, 65% of Americans identify as Christian while only about 6% have a worldview consistent with what the Bible teaches, and a dismal percent of pastors have a biblical worldview. If you have no theological criteria for where you’re sending people, you’re actually more likely than not—based on statistics—to be sending them to a church whose teachings don’t line up with those of the Bible. In other words, you’re sending unsuspecting truth seekers to places where they won’t hear truth.

Perhaps they have tightened up their criteria but aren’t explicitly saying that on the site. I’ll be happy to update my comments here if someone from the campaign wants to reach out and contact me.

Closing Thoughts

In conclusion, I want to say I’m sure there is good that will come from the campaign. I hope there is much good that comes from it. And I know God can make good come from anything He chooses. But those aren’t reasons to not critique something and offer discernment. I find it highly discouraging that when there is so much money being poured into a campaign, it’s being used to further the perception that Jesus is the same Jesus people already believe in rather than the one they need to believe in. Promoting a social justice Jesus can actually make talking about the real Jesus more difficult, because He Gets Us has placed one more data point in people’s minds that it’s His followers who talk about all that “unpopular stuff” who don’t get it. They’ll come away knowing Jesus gets them, but they won’t get Him.

Let’s hope a lot of people get to Bible reading plans 4 and 5.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)     

Was Jesus Intolerant? by Frank Turek (DVD and Mp4)

Correct not Politically Correct: About Same-Sex Marriage and Transgenderism by Frank Turek (Book, MP4)

Jesus vs. The Culture by Dr. Frank Turek DVD, Mp4 Download, and Mp3

Another Gospel? by Alisa Childers (book)

 

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Natasha Crain is a blogger, author, and national speaker who is passionate about equipping Christian parents to raise their kids with an understanding of how to make a case for and defend their faith in an increasingly secular world. She is the author of two apologetics books for parents: Talking with Your Kids about God (2017) and Keeping Your Kids on God’s Side (2016). Natasha has an MBA in marketing and statistics from UCLA and a certificate in Christian apologetics from Biola University. A former marketing executive and adjunct professor, she lives in Southern California with her husband and three children.

Original Blog Source: https://natashacrain.com/here-comes-the-he-gets-us-campaign-again-why-its-portrayal-of-jesus-is-still-a-problem/

/by

The Pulpit Apologist, Pt. 2

In my previous blog, I briefly unpacked five ways apologetic preaching can help the church navigate these challenging times, while also sharing four of eight points of what it looks like to apologetically equip our congregations today. In this post, I’ll briefly unpack points five through eight before concluding with a few final thoughts. That said, if we’re going to apologetically equip our churches, here’s how we can do that.

Fifth, set an apologetic tone that is humble and refuse to be a bully from the pulpit.

Sadly, many pastors have used this humility as an excuse to avoid apologetics altogether. But that would be throwing the baby out with the bath water. We can’t detach our pulpit presentation from our personal character. Apologetics in preaching is important, but we want to present a humble apologetic. As James Sire reminds us in A Little Primer on Humble Apologetics, “It is important to see that a humble holy life is far more significant than one’s ability to fashion and present a verbal apologetic for that life.”[1]

Sixth, it’s holistic.

Apologetics often has the reputation of being all head and no heart. But with a holistic approach to apologetics, it’s a head, heart, and hands endeavor. Many left-brain types of people love to conquer content, but the point of the content is to shape our character.

Seventh, apologetics can’t save anyone.

This point is a concession. As great as apologetics can be, it doesn’t save people. But it can erase obstacles preventing people from seeing the truth. And the good news is this. The Holy Spirit can accomplish more through one powerful encounter than we can through an entire lifetime of preaching.

Eighth, remember, the pulpit is not meant to be exclusively used for apologetics.

I’ve had many people come to churches where I’ve pastored only to say, “We want to be a part of an apologetics church” and I’m quick to reply, “We aren’t an apologetics church, but rather we are a church that does apologetics.” There’s a difference. Our faith is not only to be defended but enjoyed. There’s more to the church than apologetics. There’s’ community, service, outreach, and so much more. The church is the place to practice heaven on earth. And think about it. In heaven there won’t be a need for apologetics.

As I bring this to a wrap, the general principles we discussed might benefit from some specific preaching tips. Here are a few practical tips to remember for making your pulpit more apologetically mindful.

  1. Anticipate Objections: As you prepare your message proactively anticipate objections that need to be addressed. For example, if you’re teaching John 14:6 about Jesus being the way, the truth and the life don’t fail to answer the obvious question, “What about those who never heard?” Nothing is more frustrating than a pastor or commentator who skips over the obvious due to a lack of preparation or a fear of conflict.
  2. Be Transparent: As you deliver your message model a concessional apologetic approach when appropriate. For example, admit your own struggles that you had with the text and how you reconciled the tension you felt. When we preach as if we never wrestle with the text our people may wrongly conclude that we’ve got it altogether. We don’t. Every honest pastor knows the tension of trying to understand various difficult passages. Admit that. For example, did you struggle with doubt, or relatability, or coming to a clear interpretation? We often begin our Sunday morning message by sharing the conclusions we’ve made about the text without sharing the process we went through to arrive there. That’s where the connection happens between a pastor and his flock. So, be vulnerable. Let people know the types of questions and doubts you wrestled with and show them how you resolved the tension. Perhaps you still feel the tension. That’s okay. Let them know you’re still praying for clarity. Remove the pressure from thinking you must have a solid position for every passage you teach. Sometimes our study will lead to further questions than answers. That’s okay. You’re thinking. And learning takes time.
  3. Tell The Story: Finally, as you develop your message remember to leverage the power of story. Stories add color to our apologetic content. And no one modeled the power of story better than Jesus. Storytelling makes apologetics more digestible. It’s one way we can connect hard truths to the human heart. That’s because stories grab our attention. Stories move us more than propositions. So, paint your propositions with pictures of real-life stories. Our people will struggle to grasp the need for apologetics until they understand the relevance of it. And nothing will establish the relevance of apologetics more than real life stories of how apologetics has helped real life people find real life answers.          

Footnotes:

[1] (2006; pgs. 16-17)

 

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide)

I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Paperback), and (Sermon) by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek

Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions by Greg Koukl (Book)

Counter Culture Christian: Is the Bible True? by Frank Turek (Mp3), (Mp4), and (DVD)

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bobby serves as lead pastor of Image Church in Charlotte, North Carolina, and is well known for his YouTube ministry called, One Minute Apologist, which now goes by the name Christianity Still Makes Sense. He also serves as the Co-Host of Pastors’ Perspective, a nationally syndicated call-in radio show on KWVE in Southern California. Bobby earned his Master of Theology degree from Dallas Theological Seminary, his Doctor of Ministry in Apologetics from Southern Evangelical Seminary, and his Ph.D. in Philosophy of Religion from the University of Birmingham (England), where he was supervised under David Cheetham and Yujin Nagasawa. Bobby’s also written several books, including The Fifth Gospel, Doubting Toward Faith, Does God Exist, and Fifty-One Other Questions About God and the Bible, and the forthcoming Christianity Still Makes Sense, to be published by Tyndale in April 2024. He’s married to his lovely wife Heather, and together they have two grown kids: Haley and Dawson.

 

/by