You are on page 1of 2

Raising ones self-consciousness [awareness] about worldviews is an essential part of intellectual maturity.

The right eyeglasses can put the world into clearer focus, and the correct worldview can function in much the same way. hen someone loo!s at the world from the perspective of the wrong worldview, the world wont ma!e much sense to him. "r what he thin!s ma!es sense will, in fact, be wrong in important respects. #utting on the right conceptual scheme, that is, viewing the world through the correct worldview, can have important repercussions for the rest of the persons understanding of events and ideas. $nstead of thin!ing of %hristianity as a collection of theological bits and pieces to be believed or debated, we should approach our faith as a conceptual system, as a total world-and-life view. & 'et(s loo! at it another way. There is a difference between strategy and tactics. )trategy involves the big picture, the large-scale operation, one(s positioning prior to engagement. *

Negative/Positive Apologetics
Positive Apologetics: supplying reasons for believing the Christian faith (offensive). Negative Apologetics: answers to objections to the Christian faith (defensive). +istinguishing between negative and positive apologetics can be helpful. In negative apologetics, the ma,or ob,ective is producing answers to challenges to the %hristian faith. The proper tas! of negative apologetics is removing obstacles to faith. -any people refuse to believe because they thin! that difficulties li!e the problem of evil or the alleged impossibility of miracles ma!es the acceptance of some important %hristian beliefs untenable. hen enough tenets of the %hristian faith become unacceptable .for some, this need involve only one claim, such as the $ncarnation or the Resurrection/, they find unbelief easier than faith. $n negative apologetics, the apologist is playing defense. In positive apologetics, the apologist begins to play offense. $t is one thing to show .or attempt to show/ that assorted arguments against religious faith are wea! or unsound0 it is a rather different tas! to offer people reasons why they should believe. The latter is the tas! of positive apologetics. The person engaged in doing positive apologetics might attempt to provide proofs or arguments for the e1istence of 2od. "r the apologist might direct the attention of the unbeliever to something he already !nows and help him see how such a belief supports in some way the e1istence of 2od. What Does this Distinction Have to Do with Apologetics? (CARM) 34pologetics is the branch of %hristianity that deals with the defense and establishment of the %hristian faith.5 4s such, it is concerned with providing answers to common ob,ections to the %hristian faith, which are, in essence, ob,ections to the revealed character and will of 2od. To ob,ect to the revealed character of 2od is to ob,ect to 2od 6imself0 and to ob,ect to the revealed will of 2od is to ob,ect to 6is standard of moral ,udgment0 it is, therefore, to sin. "n the other hand, apologetics aims to provide not only a criti7ue of non-%hristian worldviews, but also see!s to establish the %hristian faith. These two ways of doing apologetics have been called negative apologetics and positive apologetics. $n my own estimation, negative apologetics, which see!s to dismantle supposed opposition to the %hristian faith, corresponds roughly to the Law, the primary purpose of which is to remove the unbelievers supposed grounds for continuing in sin0 whereas positive apologetics, which presents proofs in favor of the %hristian faith, corresponds roughly to the Gospel. The former e1poses the heart of %hrists opponents in revealing their
&

Ronald 6. 8ash, Worldviews in Conflict: Choosing Christianity in a World of deas .2rand Rapids, -$9 :ondervan, &;;*/, ;, &<-&=, &;. * 2regory >ou!l, Tactics9 4 2ame #lan for +iscussing ?our %hristian %onvictions .2rand Rapids, -$9 :ondervan, *@@;/, *A.

underlying presuppositions and removing the possibility of ma!ing e1cuses for themselves0 the latter is declarative, presenting the %hristian faith to the unbeliever in purely positive terms. 6ere are some te1ts that will, $ hope, show you what $ mean. [a.] 38egative5 4pologetics .'aw/ e destroy argu!ents and every lofty opinion raised against the !nowledge of 2od, and ta!e every thought captive to obey %hrist . * %or &@9A/ e must be able to refute those who are in error .Titus &9;b/ 2od has destroyed the wisdo! of the wise .& %or &9&=-*&/ [b.] 3#ositive5 4pologetics .2ospel/ But in our hearts we honor the 'ord as holy, always being prepared to !a"e a defense to anyone who as!s us for a reason for the hope that is in us .& #eter C9&A/ But we must hold firm to the trustworthy ord [of the 2ospel] as taught, and give instruction therein .Titus &9;a/ But %hrist has beco!e for us wisdo! fro! #od .& %or &9C@/

$n column [a.], the tas! is one of deconstruction, destroying opposing worldviews0 in column [b.], the tas! is one of building up, !a"ing a defense. 4gain, in column [a.] the tas! corresponds to the preaching of the 'aw in that it removes any supposed e1cuse an unbeliever may present for his unbelief0 in column [b.], the tas! corresponds to the 2ospel in that it presents a positive case for the %hristian faith. The former leaves the proud unbeliever without e1cuse, removing all pretence, and e1posing the nature of his unbelief .it is moral first and intellectual second/0 the latter gives the unbeliever what he cannot on his own find and possess9 the truth. Arguing People Into Heaven No one is converted through apologetics. The charge is made that no one ever comes to %hrist through apologetics. $f this implies that the 6oly )pirit never uses apologetic evidence to bring people to %hrist, this is clearly false. %. ). 'ewis noted that $nearly everyone "now who has e!braced Christianity in adult life has been influenced by what see!ed to hi! to be at least a probable argu!ent for %heis!.$ 'ewis is an e1ample of an atheist who came to %hrist under the influence of apologetics. The s!eptic Dran! -orrison was converted while attempting to write a boo! refuting the evidence for the resurrection of %hrist .see -orrison/. 4ugustine tells in his confessions how he was led toward %hristianity by hearing a %hristian debate an unbeliever. 6arvard 'aw )chool professor )imon 2reenleaf was led to accept the authenticity of the 2ospels by applying the rules of legal evidence to the 8ew Testament. 2od has used evidence and reason in some way to reach virtually all adults who come to %hrist. C

8orman '. 2eisler, &a"er 'ncyclopedia of Christian Apologetics .2rand Rapids9 Ba!er Boo!s, &;;;/, E&.

You might also like