OCF Convention 2024: An Introduction to Apologetics

What is Apologetics?

Apologetics is giving a reason for why you believe what you believe.
Christian apologetics attempts to give a case for Christianity.
“Christian apologetics is the rational defense of the Christian worldview as objectively true, rationally compelling and existentially or subjectively engaging. The word apologetics comes from the Greek word apologia, which can be translated as ‘defense’ or ‘vindication’” (Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, 2022, 10).

Apologetics is not…

Apologizing, saying sorry.
Arguing (quarreling).
“Intellectual bullying.”
“A substitute for evangelism” (Anderson, RTS)

Biblical Foundations

1 Pet 3:15 “But set Christ apart as Lord in your hearts and always be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks about the hope you possess. 16 Yet do it with courtesy and respect, keeping a good conscience, so that those who slander your good conduct in Christ may be put to shame when they accuse you” (NET2).
ἀπολογία, the act of making a defense (BDAG, 117).

Jesus’ Apologetic Approach

Geisler and Zukeran argue that Jesus used reason and evidence, was holistic, was loving, believed in the necessity of the Holy Spirit, and met people where they were (The Apologetics of Jesus, 2008).

Paul

Acts 17:2–3 “As was his custom, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that the Messiah had to suffer and rise from the dead” (NIV 2011).
Acts 17:22 So Paul stood before the Areopagus and said, “Men of Athens, I see that you are very religious in all respects.23 For as I went around and observed closely your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: ‘To an unknown god.’ Therefore what you worship without knowing it, this I proclaim to you. 24 The God who made the world and everything in it, who is Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by human hands, 25 nor is he served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives life and breath and everything to everyone. 26 From one man he made every nation of the human race to inhabit the entire earth, determining their set times and the fixed limits of the places where they would live, 27 so that they would search for God and perhaps grope around for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. 28 For in him we live and move about and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we too are his offspring.’ 29 So since we are God’s offspring, we should not think the deity is like gold or silver or stone, an image made by human skill and imagination. 30 Therefore, although God has overlooked such times of ignorance, he now commands all people everywhere to repent, 31 because he has set a day on which he is going to judge the world in righteousness, by a man whom he designated, having provided proof to everyone by raising him from the dead.” (NET)

Apologetics is not primary, but it is important

So how does a uni student defend the faith?
Know God’s word and live it out.
When God brings someone along, as appropriate, state what the Christian faith is in word and deed.
Prayerfully and respectfully ask if he (or she) like to trust Jesus as Lord and Savior. If not, why not – listen and respond to his (or her) questions.

An Overview of Apologetics

Truth and religious epistemology: evidentialism, reformed epistemology, fideism, phenomenal conservatism, proper functionalism (see: Debating Christian Religious Epistemology: An Introduction to Five Views on the Knowledge of God)
Does God exist? Cosmological argument, teleological argument (fine tuning), moral argument (and axiology), ontological argument, etc. Objections: The coherence of theism, including the problem of evil.
Is Christianity true: Did Jesus rise from the dead? Is the Bible reliable? Defeaters from science, sexuality, pluralism, other religions/worldviews…

What is Christianity?

How would you briefly state what Christians believe…
What is the shortest way you can state what Christian’s claim?

“God raised Christ”

Why think God exists?

Evidence from the Bible (special revelation) and arguments outside the Bible (but not apart from a Christian worldview) from natural theology.
For those who do not accept the authority of Scripture, reasoning with them from natural theology can be beneficial.

The Value of Arguments

There are few full-proof arguments (all-compelling arguments); usually, it is a matter of more probable than not.
Consider logos (reason and logic), ethos (credible character), and pathos (appeal to emotion, imagination, and values). Persuasive rhetoric.
When you make an argument, you should try to do it from the background of the person that you are speaking to (using their assumptions, starting from common ground).
God can and does use these to draw people to himself.

The Burden of Proof

Any claim (positive or negative) needs to be supported by reasons.
I.e., the theist, since he says there is a God, needs to give his reasons for thinking this. The atheist says there is no god and needs to give his reasons. The default position is the weak agnostic who says I do not know if there is a god or not.

What if there is no God?

Then there is no meaning or purpose in life…
Morality is subjective, just pragmatics, just temporary survival of the fittest…
There is no hope for the future, no justice…

See https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-writings/existence-nature-of-god/the-absurdity-of-life-without-god

Define “God”

“The term “God,” is traditionally understood, signifies a personal being who is worthy of worship” (Gould, Beyond the Control of God?, 2014, 1).
The being who is supremely perfect and is at least omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent.
God refers to the greatest possible being (or maximally excellent being).

Some Arguments for God’s existence

Cosmological arguments
Teleological arguments (design)
Axiological arguments (moral and aesthetic values)
Ontological arguments (from the being or nature of God)
Experiential arguments

See Dougherty and Walls, eds., Two Dozen (or so) Arguments for God, 2018.

WLC’s Kalam Cosmological Argument

Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
The universe began to exist.
Therefore, the universe has a cause.

See http://www.reasonablefaith.org/kalam

A Teleological Argument

The fine-tuning of the universe is due to either physical necessity, chance, or design.
It is not due to physical necessity or chance.
Therefore, it is due to design.

See http://www.reasonablefaith.org/finetuning

A Moral Argument

There are objective moral facts.
God provides the best explanation of the existence of objective moral facts.
Therefore, (probably) God exists.

See https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-arguments-god/ http://www.reasonablefaith.org/moral

Plantinga’s Ontological Argument

It is possible that a maximally great being exists.
If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great being exists in some possible world.
If a maximally great being exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.
If a maximally great being exists in every possible world, then it exists in the actual world.
If a maximally great being exists in the actual world, then a maximally great being exists.
Therefore, a maximally great being exists.

See https://www.reasonablefaith.org/ontological/

A Note on Argumentation

Everything that begins to exist has a cause. 51%
The universe began to exist. 51%
Therefore, the universe has a cause. 51%x51% = 26%
So individually, you need 71%x71%=50.4%
Or cumulatively Cosmological (say 26%) + Teleological (26%) = 45% + Moral (26%) = 59%

Pascal’s Wager

	God exists	God does not exist
Believe	infinite gain	finite loss
Disbelieve	infinite loss	finite gain

See Groothuis, Beyond the Wager: The Christian Brilliance of Blaise Pascal, 2024.

Theories to Explain the Data Concerning Jesus’ Resurrection

The story developed as legend over time; a mere myth
The disciples didn’t experience anything but claimed they did (false claims or no experience hypothesis)
All experiences of Jesus were intra-mental (hallucination theory)
What the disciples experienced was extra-mental but was not actually Jesus (mistaken identity theory)
The disciples extra-mentally experienced Jesus, but Jesus didn’t actually die on the cross, just fainted and revived naturally in the tomb (swoon theory) [or Jesus escaped, someone else was crucified and Jesus later showed himself to the disciples].
They experienced Jesus who had died and was back from the dead (resurrection hypothesis)
See: Loke, Investigating the Resurrection of Jesus Christ: A New Transdisciplinary Approach, 2020.

Video: https://www.reasonablefaith.org/did-jesus-rise-from-the-dead

The Logical Problem of Evil

God exists and is omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good.
There is evil.
Can both be true?

Hidden Assumption
An omnipotent, omniscient and perfectly good being would have no good reason for allowing evil.

Reasons God Might Have

Creatures with libertarian freewill
For other creatures to develop character (a soul making defence).

The Positions on Freewill

Hard determinism – freedom is incompatible with determinism and humans are not free.
Soft determinism – compatibilism: freedom is compatible with determinism.
Libertarianism – that determinism and freedom are incompatible and some human choices are made freely.

A Definition of Freewill

“a significant kind of control over one’s actions” and choices (to be morally responsible).
The principle of alternate possibilities: the ability to do otherwise. That one could refrain.
Soft determinist generally understand freedom as being able to do according to one’s greatest desires.
Libertarianists that at least some actions are not determined [at least by anything external to oneself, the agent is the source of choice].

The Probabilistic Problem

1) God exists
2) There is evil
Evidential problem: P(1|2) = very low
[Probability of (1) given (2) = very low]

Craig’s Response

We are not in a good position to assess the probability of whether God has morally sufficient reasons for the evils that occur.
The Christian faith entails doctrines that increase the probability of the co-existence of God and evil.
1. The chief purpose of life is not happiness, but the knowledge of God.
1. Mankind is in a state of rebellion against God and His purpose.
1. The knowledge of God spills over into eternal life.
1. The knowledge of God is an incommensurable good.
Relative to the full scope of the evidence, God’s existence is probable.

The Emotional Problem of Evil

How can I personally trust a God who allows evil?
The cross of Christ; a good creation; sin; the vantage from the end; Heb 2:18; the body of Christ; 2 Pet 3:4–9; John 9:1–3; Luke 13:1–5; Job.
Ashlyn Blocker and the gift of pain

Video: https://www.reasonablefaith.org/suffering-and-evil

Some Christians who Contributed to Science

Nicolaus Copernicus (1473–1543), who formulated a model with the earth rotating around the sun
Francis Bacon (1561–1626), who developed the scientific method
Galileo Galilei (1564–1642), who advanced the telescope and made various astronomical observations
Johann Kepler (1571–1630), who purposed elliptical orbits
Robert Boyle (1627–1691), who made advances in chemistry and formulated the law named after him to do with the relationship between the pressure and volume of a gas
Isaac Newton (1642–1727), who developed calculus and formulated laws of motion and gravity
Michael Faraday (1791–1867), who invented the laws of electromagnetism and the first electric motor
James Joule (1818–1889), who discovered the electrical relationship between the current and resistance of a conductor
Gregor Mendel (1822–1884), who developed the biology of genetics
Louis Pasteur (1822–1895), who discovered that microorganisms cause disease and developed pasteurization to kill such pathogens
William Thompson, Lord Kelvin (1824–1907), who had a significant role in the development of the second law of thermodynamics and the absolute temperature scale
James Clerk Maxwell (1831–1879), who developed the theory of electromagnetism
John Polkinghorne (1930–2021), who developed mathematical models to calculate the paths of quantum particles
Francis Collins, who led the Human Genome Project
George Ellis, who co-authored The Large-Scale Structure of Space-Time with physicist Stephen Hawking
Andrew Pinsent, who contributed to the creation of the Large Electron-Positron Collider
All this to say, if Christianity and science are in conflict, why is it that some of the best scientists were Christians, not to mention that the scientific method grew out of a Christian worldview.

Some Presuppositions of Science

“The existence of a theory-independent, external world
The orderly nature of the external world;
The knowability of the external world
The existence of truth;
The laws of logic;
The reliability of our cognitive and sensory faculties to serve as truth gatherers and as a source of justified beliefs in our intellectual environment;
The adequacy of language to describe the world;
The existence of values used in science (e.g., “test theories fairly and report test results honestly”);
The uniformity of nature and induction;
The existence of numbers.” (Craig and Moreland, Philosophical Foundations, 372).

Scientism

“One should only believe scientific truths”
Or that “science is the measure of what matters”

Things science cannot prove:

Logic and Mathematics
Other Minds
Ethics
Aesthetics
Science Itself
Historical truths

How/When God Created? The Positions

	Biological Macroevolution	Cosmic Evolution
Young Earth Creation http://creation.com/ https://answersingenesis.org/	No	No
Progressive Creationist / Old Earth Creation http://www.reasons.org/	No	Yes
Evolutionary Creation / Theistic Evolution http://biologos.org/	Yes	Yes

Uses of the term Evolution

Biological change and diversity
Life forms came from earlier ones (descent with modification)
Genetic variation and natural selection (microevolution)
Common ancestry – a tree of life (macroevolution)
Naturalistic/atheistic evolution: that the universe and all life came without God

Is the Bible Reliable?

Why it matters
The positions/views
Oral transmission
The Canon
Manuscript Transmission
The Witness of the Spirit
Historical Investigation
Apparent Conflicts
Science
Modern Translations

An Argument for Scripture

“Whatever God teaches is true.
Historical, prophetic and other evidences show that Jesus is God.
Therefore, whatever Jesus teaches is true.
Jesus taught that the scriptures are the inerrant and authoritative word of God.
Therefore, the Bible is the inerrant word of God” WLC, RF

Textaul Variants

There are about 138,000 words in the NT, there are about 500,000 textual variants.
Most being spelling errors and non-sense errors.
Variants that make no translational difference. Such as the article “the Mary” instead of just “Mary.” The most common variant is “a” and “an.” Or synonyms i.e., Luke 24:53 “and were continually in the temple courts blessing* God.” * could read, “praising.”
Meaningful But Not Viable : Variants that would affect the meaning of the verse, but they are not likely original because they are limited to only one manuscript or family of manuscripts. An example is 1 Thess 2:9, where most manuscripts read “the Gospel of God.” One late medieval manuscript instead has “The gospel of Christ.”
The final category consists of variants that are both meaningful and viable. Only 1% of all variants in the New Testament (These are basically the 3000 or so variants in NA28). These do not affect any core doctrine. i.e., Rom 5:1 “we have peace with God,” or “let us have peace with God.” The difference in Greek is only a single letter.

Defining Miracles

A theist might say a miracle is “a less common kind of God’s activity (Grudem, Systematic Theology, 2nd, 2020, 470).
Whereas an atheist might say a miracle is “a violation of natural law” (Hume, Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding, 3rd, 1748, 114).
Each seems to presuppose that God either exists or does not exist. Question begging – assuming what you are trying to prove.
One “may recognize that an event is a miracle when the event (a) is extremely unlikely to have occurred, given the circumstances and/or natural law and (b) it occurs in an environment or context charged with religious significance” (Licona, “Historians and Miracle Claims”, 119).

A Brief Case for Miracles

If God exists, then miracles are possible.
Miracles do not destroy science since a scientist need only hold that “every event has a cause,” or that “the observable universe operates in an orderly way,” or that science operates on the repeatable, or that science functions on methodological naturalism but doesn’t pronounce on metaphysical naturalism.

Defining Sex and Gender

“Gender refers to the characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially constructed” https://www.who.int/health-topics/gender
“sex, which refers to the different biological and physiological characteristics of females, males and intersex persons, such as chromosomes, hormones and reproductive organs” https://www.who.int/health-topics/gender

Gender dysphoria

The emotional and psychological condition of believing one’s gender is different than one’s biological sex.

Bogardus, “Evaluating Arguments for the Sex/Gender Distinction.”

“Many philosophers believe that our ordinary English words man and woman are “gender terms,” and gender is distinct from biological sex. That is, they believe womanhood and manhood are not defined even partly by biological sex. This sex/gender distinction is one of the most influential ideas of the twentieth century on the broader culture, both popular and academic. Less well known are the reasons to think it’s true. My interest in this paper is to show that, upon investigation, the arguments for the sex/gender distinction have feet of clay. In fact, they all fail. We will survey the literature and tour arguments in favor of the sex/gender distinction, and then we’ll critically evaluate those arguments. We’ll consider the argument from resisting biological determinism, the argument from biologically intersex people and vagueness, the argument from the normativity of gender, and some arguments from thought experiments. We’ll see that these arguments are not up to the task of supporting the sex/ gender distinction; they simply don’t work. So, philosophers should either develop stronger arguments for the sex/gender distinction, or cultivate a variety of feminism that’s consistent with the traditional, biologically-based definitions of woman and man.”

Bogardus, “Why the Trans Inclusion Problem Cannot Be Solved.”

What is a woman? … “Ameliorative Inquirists” have rolled up their sleeves to reengineer our ordinary concept of womanhood, with a goal of including in the definition all and only those who identify as women, both “cis” and “trans.”… Every proposal so far has failed to draw the boundaries of womanhood in a way acceptable to the Ameliorative Inquirists, since not all those who identify as women count as women on these proposals, and some who count as women on these proposals don’t identify as women. This is the Trans Inclusion Problem. Is there any solution? Can there be? Recently, Katharine Jenkins, pointing to the work of Mari Mikkola, suggests that the Trans Inclusion Problem can be “deflated” rather than solved. We will investigate this proposal, and show that, unfortunately, Jenkins is mistaken: Mikkola’s project will not help us answer the Trans Inclusion Problem. After that, we’ll look at Robin Dembroff’s suggestion that we “imitate” the linguistic practices of trans inclusive and queer communities, and we will evaluate whether this would help us solve the Trans Inclusion Problem. Unfortunately, this strategy also fails to solve the problem. By the end, we’ll have a better appreciation of the challenges faced by Ameliorative Inquirists in their project of redefining “woman,” and clearer view of why the Trans Inclusion Problem cannot, in fact, be solved. That’s primarily because, no matter what it means to be a woman, it’s one thing to be a woman, and another thing to identify as a woman.

Defining Homosexuality

Definition: Engaging in sexual relations with (or having a sexual attraction to) persons of the same sex.

The NT on Homosexuality

1 Cor. 6:9–10, “Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God.“ (also 1 Tim 1:9–10)
Etymology: two different Greek words: μαλακός, soft to touch or a male prostitute likely referring to the male who plays the passive role. ἀρσενοκοίτης, literally “male-bedders,” likely referring to the male who plays the active role.

Understanding these Texts

“all of these passages condemn particular sexual acts. None of them speak of homosexual desires. In the Scriptures it is not homosexual temptation that is wrong, but the actual acts themselves.” Hard Sayings

Reformed Epistemology

Belief in God and the great truths of Christianity can be properly basic (warranted or justified apart from arguments).
“The Spirit himself bears witness to/with our spirit that we are God’s children” (Rom 8:16).
See: Plantinga, Knowledge and Christian Belief, 2015.