Apologetics in 3D

Essays on Apologetics and Spirituality

Peter S. Williams

• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Year: 2021
• Print ISBN: 9781666702897, 9781666702903
• eBook ISBN: 9781666702910
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christian Theology

This collection of papers and other materials from English philosopher Peter S. Williams develops a holistic vision for Christian apologetics centered around a biblical understanding of spirituality. Grounded in two decades of practical experience, here is a vision of apologetics that's interested in communicating through beauty and goodness as well as logic and arguments.

1

Apologetics in 3D

Persuading across Spiritualities with the Apostle Paul

Abstract

This paper advances a holistic definition of Christian apologetics as: “The art of persuasively advocating Christian spirituality across spiritualities, through the responsible use of classical rhetoric, as being objectively true, beautiful, and good.” This definition is based upon a tripartite understanding of “spirituality” (as “worldview beliefs married to attitudes that lead to actions”) conjoined with the three elements of classical rhetoric (logos, pathos and ethos) and the three traditional transcendental values (truth, beauty and goodness). This definition constitutes a three-by-three conceptual matrix for apologetics “in 3D.” I will argue that this vision of apologetics is exemplified by the apostle Paul in Athens.

Apologetics in 3D: Persuading Across Spiritualities with the Apostle Paul

This paper—a contribution to the field of metapologetics1—advances a holistic definition of apologetics2 as:

•The art of persuasively advocating Christian spirituality across spiritualities, through the responsible use of classical rhetoric, as being objectively true, beautiful and good.

After contrasting this definition of apologetics with some standard definitions and commenting upon the evolving role of worldview analysis within apologetics, I will unpack all three clauses of the above definition before arguing that it captures Paul’s approach to apologetics as exemplified by his Athenian mission.

On Standard Definitions of Apologetics

A key advantage of my definition of apologetics is that it avoids narrow intellectualism without downplaying the importance of the intellect. The discipline of Christian apologetics is commonly defined in purely academic3 terms. For example:

•R.C. Sproul, John Gerstner and Arthur Lindsey state that “Apologetics is the reasoned defence of the Christian religion.”4

•C. Stephen Evans defines apologetics as “The rational defence of Christian faith.”5

•Winfried Corduan says that “The defence of the truth of Christianity is called apologetics.”6

•James E. Taylor writes that “Christian apologists defend the truth of Christian claims . . . they try to show that it is reasonable to believe what Christians believe.”7

•Francis J. Beckwith explains that “responding to . . . challenges and offering reasons for one’s faith is called apologetics.”8

•John Frame describes apologetics as a matter of three inter-related elements: “(1) proof, rational confirmation for faith; (2) defence, replies to criticisms; and (3) offense, bringing criticisms against non-Christian ideas.”9

•William Lane Craig writes that: “Apologetics (from the Greek apologia: defence) is that branch of Christian theology which seeks to provide rational justification for the truth claims of the Christian faith.”10

•Norman L. Geisler and Patrick Zukeran likewise note that “Apologetics comes from the Greek word apologia, which means a defence” and write of the apologist as one who “uses reason and evidence to present a rational defence of the Christian faith.”11

•H. Wayne House and Dennis W. Jowers affirm that “Apologetics . . . is a defence (apologia) of one’s position or worldview as a means of establishing its validity and integrity. It is an attempt to establish the truth of the matter and to present a convincing argument in support of it.”12

This isn’t to say that everyone who gives an academic definition of apologetics necessarily does apologetics in a merely academic way (for example, Craig uses existential concerns in his apologetic13), or that they don’t qualify their definitions (e.g. Geisler and Zukeran subtitle their book “A Caring Approach to Dealing with Doubters,” etc.14). However, such disjunctions between apologetic definition and practice underline the need to revisit the definition.

While the academic definitions of apologetics given by Sproul et al. are technically correct, they nevertheless short-change our understanding (and thereby our practice) of apologetics. To define an apologist as a person who “uses reason and evidence to present a rational defence of the Christian faith” is rather like defining a chef as “someone who prepares edible ingredients to be eaten.” Neither definition is exactly wrong, but they are both thin and misleading. They are, we might say, necessary but insufficient descriptions. How the chef prepares her ingredients is at least as important as the mere ...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Foreword
• Author’s Preface
• Chapter 1: Apologetics in 3D
• Chapter 2: A Pre-Modern Reflection upon the Modernist Foundations of Postmodernism
• Chapter 3: The Apologetics of Cultural Re-Enchantment in 3D
• Chapter 4: Responsible Apologetics
• Appendix I: The Matrix of Spirituality in 3D
• Appendix II: From Glory to Glory
• Recommended Resources
• Bibliography