## Apologetics

The word apologetics goes back to the idea of an "apology", which comes from the Greek meaning a justification or defense (literally, apo-logos, or "away-from knowledge").

Apologetics, in general, boils down to two approaches:

1. Deconstruct the other person's beliefs and provoke them to doubt their particular faith.
2. Convey a reliable framework of thought for your beliefs.
   - Everyone's faith starts as an individual [story](stories.md), then branches out into [understanding](understanding.md).

- You must choose one of them, and it's not possible to do both.

Be careful with apologetics.

- There is a steady subculture of Christians who obsess with making strong, articulate arguments to defend every aspect of their faith.
- However, each person has their path to walk, and they should walk with conviction even if it's not *precisely* correct the way you understand it ([Romans 14:1-6](https://biblehub.com/romans/14.htm)).
  - In general, you're wasting your time with denominational politics, and should focus on shared values instead ([Mark 9:38-41](https://biblehub.com/mark/9.htm)).
  - The *one* exception, though, is when that denomination is practicing [legitimate heresy](conflicts-christian-1_why.md).
- Make sure you keep in mind that Christians aren't known by their rock-solid views *nearly* as much as their love for each other ([John 13:34-35](https://biblehub.com/john/13.htm)).

Most apologetics does *not* start with the Bible.

- There's no reason to bring the Bible into a discussion where someone doesn't find it relevant.
- It only becomes relevant to them when they want to hear how it's relevant to *you*.

There are a wide variety of apologetics disciplines, based on their initial approach:

- Philosophical apologetics often draws from Catholic [philosophers](philosophy.md) (e.g., Augustine, Aquinas, Anselm).
  - These are *powerful* in many contexts, but can't refute the complete doubt and hopelessness represented in postmodernism.
  - The better approach is to aim for the [meaning](meaning.md) in Christ (often expressed through C.S. Lewis' works).
- Scientific apologetics aim to refute modern Darwinian-style thought.
  - They use the data from [scientific studies](science.md) to represent biblical truths.
  - This is a minority view in the [scientific community](science.md), mostly because the majority of scientists are atheist, but claim to have no [bias](mind-bias.md).
  - Be careful how precisely you assert some aspects of your faith, and expect to look silly if it's a public forum.
- Inter-religious apologetics aims to give clear answers in comparison to [other belief systems](religion.md).
  - The basis for the discussions should be targeted at key philosophical values, *not* about the culture surrounding those values.

No matter what, [apologetics](evangelism-apologetics.md) is only good to sow doubt, *not* to create a conversion.

- Everyone who converts from one belief system to another has to go through an "agnostic" period, where they're not really sure what they believe anymore.
- It often takes time for someone to convert, and God is the creator of the results ([1 Corinthians 3:6-8](https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/3.htm)).

In general, ask questions more than give statements.

- Never make an assertion when it could be expressed as a question.
- Questions bring more thought than statements.
  - By asking questions, people ask those same questions in their mind even after you're done talking with them.
  - The person answering the question has to make more assertions to defend their beliefs.
- Do *not* answer the questions unless they ask you, since it robs them of their [meaning](meaning.md) from discovering a truth.
- Most of the time, a spiritual [conflict](people-5_conflicts.md) is based in [emotions](mind-feelings.md), *not* [logic](logic.md).
  - Your purpose should be to [understand and learn](understanding.md) about them and their views, *not* to dismantle their perspective.

Eventually, you *will* get a question you don't know the answer to.

- Humbly and openly accept that you don't know.
  - Refusing to accept you don't know makes you as [conceited](morality-sins.md) as the rest of the world.
- Their questions frequently open up the need to [study more into it](bible-study.md), which can only grow you.
- Refer them to a more educated Christian or ask if you can [research](information.md) and get back to them.

[Defending Christianity](evangelism-apologetics.md) can be emotionally draining, but is frequently necessary.

- Don't run from the conflict or pretend they're not asking legitimate questions.
- Focus on sharing ideas and alternate views, and don't get distracted by their behavior in the discussion ([John 4:37](https://biblehub.com/john/4-37.htm)).
- Even if they become [verbally abusive](people-5_conflicts.md), your conduct can show Christ-like behavior.
- The situation becomes vastly more complex (and more important) when [dealing with cults](culture-cults.md).

Do *not* let yourself fall into a rhetorical trap.

- Highly educated people (e.g., philosophy [teachers](education.md)) sometimes bait ambitious believers into a debate.
  - However, they frequently have an unspoken advantage (e.g., a microphone), and will cut you off as soon as they see they're not winning.
- The best thing to do is to avoid a direct conflict by owning that it's not the right time or place, and let the conversation move on.
- Often, you'll get the freedom to have a discussion with some people later over the public exchange.
- Sometimes, people just like to argue, and continued dialogue with them is not worth your time.