Survey of Apologetics

Survey of Apologetics

by John M. Criswell 

1988 PSN

11 Feb 2020XX

Outline

1. Definition 

1. Why Study Apologetics 

III. New Testament Apologetics 

1. Use of Old Testament 
2. Paul and the Gentiles 

1. Patristic Era and Beyond 
2. Political Apologists 
3. Religious Apologists 

Apologists 

1. Aristides 
2. Justin Martyr 
3. Athenagoras 
4. Clement of Alexandria 
5. Origin 
6. Tertullian 

1. Interim Period 

VII. Practical Apologetics 

1. Does God Exist?
2. Life without God 
3. Ontological Argument 
4. Cosmological Argument 
5. Teleological Argument 
6. The Resurrection Factor 
7. The Empty Tomb 
8. Common Knowledge 
9. Joseph of Arimathea 
10. Paul 
11. Women 
12. Preaching 
13. Jewish Propaganda 
14. The Conspiracy Theory 
15. Apparent Death Theory
16. Eyewitness Accounts

The Ultimate Apologists

1. Conclusion

 

Dedication:

To Mom and Dad, the first apologists that ever influenced me. And my wife and constant companion: Beth 

Because of the gravity of such a topic it should be noted at the outset that any material covered in this short paper is merely introductory in nature and in no way attempts to discover the underpinnings of the field itself. The sole purpose of this writing is to project simply onto the readers mind an image of various terms, movements, and individuals associated with this field. From the outset it should be noted that an exhaustive study of the subject at hand would be impossible in this setting. With this realization the writer makes no attempt to discuss any point relating to apologetics except as it deals with Christianity in its inception and maturation process. Christian Apologetics is rich with tradition and tributary movements. Only major streams of thought will be navigated. 

Christian Apologetics 

From the very dawn of creation the human creature has felt the need to justify itself and its actions. Most actions, good or bad, especially if anticipating rejection, bring about an immediate defense from the doer. With few exceptions this rule is constant. Mankind is drawn toward a higher, at times seemingly unreachable code of ethics. A way of living that is unquestionably supreme, just, and equitable to his fellow man. Whether one attributes such a force to the "Laws of Human Nature,"I which all appeal to and expect others to have knowledge of, or whether attributed directly to God, Himself, it matters not. The truth remains the same. Mankind has an indelible since of moral obligation and moves in the direction of defending his deeds; right or wrong. 

One of the classic accounts of such an attempt at justification is found in the first book of the Bible. In Genesis the epoch unfolds as man is created in a state of perfection. God, in seeing the sinless state of his creation, pronounces that, " . . . it was very good" (Genesis 1:31). As if then to give man free choice God entrusts him the care of the beautiful garden with simple yet specific instructions. Obedience to these instructions held a blessing while refusal surely doomed man with a curse. With due time, in keeping with his rebellious spirit, man decided to disregard God's command. The fruit was eaten and nakedness was realized. As Genesis records the account one is led to understand that Adam and Eve were ashamed of their blatant transgression and thus hid themselves from the presence of the Lord. Adam's reply to God in Chapter 3:10-12 becomes the first recorded apologetic statement in defense of the sinfulness of the human race. In this classic passage Adam excuses himself by offering the plea of fear and the technique of blame. Eve was indicted. 

Although from the Old Testament, this account gives us a basic insight into the definition and application of apologetics. Apologetics simply put means a "speech in defense."2 Distinction needs to be made between the English word "Apologize" and the field of "Apologetics." While both terms are similar they stand apart in connotation. If one considers the word "Apologize" immediately there is brought to mind an attitude of meekness or remorse. One could imagine that "to apologize" means making retribution for wrongs done. This is the common usage in 20th century English. In the field of "apologetics", however, the term takes on a much more positive connotation. To make an apology does not necessarily mean that one is sorry for his beliefs or actions. It rather means that one is defending his case. Remorse may or may not be relevant. Strictly speaking, one must realize that apologetics merely means "defense of oneself." 

The Greek word apologia, meaning "speech in defense," refers to an oral and literary genre known throughout the ancient Mediterranean world."3 The concept is as old as time itself but the early Greeks exercised their skill in the field with unequaled expertise. J. B. Tyson states: 

The literary form of apology had a time-honored history, dating back to the Apology of Socrates by Plato. The customary approach was to take the charges, explore their meaning, and demonstrate their erroneous nature. Their style was characterized by clarity of exposition and interesting detail. Many were replete with quotations from poets and philosophers. They generally concentrated on one major point and gave slight attention to one or two minor matters. A concluding appeal summed up the argument. It takes a learned person to be an apologist. The writer must write in a clear, forceful, and appealing style and must be familiar with a wide range of literary allusions. He must be aware of the basic ideas and motivating forces of his opponents and must know what in his defendant will appeal to them.4 

The Encyclopedia of Religion states: 

When Socrates was accused of demonstrating impiety toward the ancestral gods of his state and of corrupting the morals of Athenian youth through adherence to unusual beliefs, he argued his case against ignorance and unenlightened authority by means of REASON. Although he failed to convince a majority of jurors that his pursuit of wisdom, which had made him a critic of prevailing religious belief, was based in truth , his effort became a model for future apologists.5 

It was in such a vein that Christian apologetics had their roots. Christians, facing a Greco-Roman culture buttressed by polytheistic beliefs and practices, where monotheism was judged to be both blasphemous and incredible, found Reason to be their only defense. Beginning in the second century CE, Christians also exercised a strenuous apologetic effort to explain the foundations of their emerging beliefs and to defend themselves against oppression and popular slander. As the pagans discovered Christians would not serve the gods legitimated by Roman authority, they were held to be atheistic and seditious elements of the population. In addition, the lifestyle that the Christians lived and the way they worshiped fostered accusations of cannibalism and incest from the pagans.6 

Religious apologetics can then be defined usefully in modern terms as the laying out of the fundamentals of religious belief.7 It becomes a systematic way to prove to others the claims of the Christian faith. It is a theoretical discipline seeking a rational justification for the truth it claims.8 Apologetics is that which directs itself toward others to persuade them by the exchange of ideas and logic. The Encyclopedia of Religion sums it up in this manner: 

Apologetics is other-directed communication of religious belief that makes assertions about knowing and serving God. It represents the content of a particular faith in an essentially intellectualism fashion and, like a national boundary, acts as a membrane for the exchange of ideas. The content of apologetics is based in the revelation of God. But its format is based in culture. Apologetics often is other-directed in so far as it presupposes, at least apparently, an audience external to the faith it represents.9

As we shall see, however, apologetics by a particular group rarely is taken seriously by those outside that group. Apologetics, if looked at in a realistic manner, tends to be self-stimulating literature. W. Walker in his book, History of the Christian Church, says that there is no evidence that apologists influenced heathen opinion or that their appeal was seriously considered by rulers toward whom it was aimed. Their work was most valuable in Christian circles.10 However disappointing this may seem, it is not without merit. Apologetics help promote the clarification of ideas within the group and forges a strategy of orthodoxy toward non-believers. 

In a nutshell apologetics may be summed up as a simple statement, "What rational defense can be given for the Christian faith."11 

Why Study Apologetics? 
To the historian and theologian the preceding material may be of interest from the perspective of theoretical and antiquarian information. Certainly theology often enshrines itself within its own Ivory Towers and the branches of higher learning are filled with "Academia Nuts." But of what use is the field of apologetics to the average Christian? Is there reason to be aware of or to study such a subject? 

As has been noted in the preceding definition, apologetics is a theoretical discipline. It is not a study that addresses the specifics of direct confrontation. William Craig in his book, Apologetics: An Introduction, says, "This means that a course in apologetics is not for the purpose of teaching you 'If he says so-and-so, then you say such-and-such." 12 Again, understand that apologetics tries to answer the question, "What rational defense can be given for the Christian faith." It works best in a theoretical context. 

Although this is the case, apologetics has many practical advantages. Even for the armchair student of Christianity it should hold some interest. As one considers the Christian faith and the attacks it has suffered in times past, the importance of Christian apologetics should become vividly clear. From its very inception Christianity has been under fire. Ridiculous as it may seem that a system which teaches good will and supreme love to ones fellow man could be persecuted, the truth remains that such is the case. Perhaps the assertion of anti-Christian writer Celcus in 178 CE will help sum up many a non-Christian's sentiment. Avrey Dulles summarizes Celcus, 

The Christians demand a faith not based on examination, and this can only be an irrational commitment. Further, they shun open debate with the learned. They operate as a secret society and, despising wisdom, seduce the ignorant and credulous. The Bible is full of childish legends and falls far below the finest achievements of classical history. It falsely teaches that God changes His mind, that He chooses favorites among the human race, and that He manages the whole of creation for the benefit of man alone.13

Though written in the 2nd century, much of this same logic is alive today. No longer can the serious Christian expect to pass off with a light brush the philosophical arguments of Atheists, Agnostics, and Diests alike. The Christian may feel that he is grounded in his faith and that it is not necessary to refute the idea that the Gospel is foolishness (1 Corinthians 1:18). This, however, can no longer be an excuse for apathy and lethargy. Hans Kung says, "Atheism today demands an account of our belief in God as it never did in the past."14 Francis Schaeffer states, " . . . we are living in a post-Christian era when the thought forms of society are fundamentally anti-Christian."15 Today as never before the Christian is surrounded with doubt and disbelief. While living in a "Christian Nation", so called, it is apparent that the thought of man's imagination is on evil continually. However alarming this may be, America is not alone. Europe has been swept with anti-Christian propaganda. W. L. Craig attests:

Atheism and Agnosticism are widespread in Europe and have become influential in the United States as well, particularly in the universities.. . Humanism has become remarkably aggressive in the United States with an almost evangelical fervor. Not only "Low Brow" atheists like Madeleine Murray O'Hare, but sophisticated and intelligent humanists who are opposing theism and Christianity with rational arguments.16

He also points out that most philosophers adhere to one of these world views. This is especially true of Universities and higher learning. For Christians it must become the task to familiarize themselves with the arguments. "As Christians we simply cannot afford to stand by, exhorting people to believe in God, without dealing with the problem on the rational level."17

In understanding the problem, let it be noted that logic may not always convince people but it is a starting point in our sophisticated society. It may not save people but it can provide an environ-ment conducive to the gospel being heard and not dismissed as a logical absurdity.18

From the above comments it might seem as if the writer has fallen into a paradoxical spiral. If education is filled with Atheism and Agnosticism how can one hope to use education to defend that which education as a whole rejects? Clarity must be made. The problem that the 20th century Christian finds himself up against is not education in general. Rather it is quite the opposite. Education, one could rightfully assert, brings one closer to theology. The difficulty arises when education purports various theories and philosophies that have no coherency with scientific truth. The Christian need not fear scientific fact for in no wise does it detriment Christ's philosophy. Perhaps the downfall of Christianity is not the system but its adherents failure to face issues and legitimate objections that have in the past been raised. W. L. Craig sums it up well in quoting the European philosopher Wolfhart Pannenberg:

For much too long a time faith has been misunderstood to be subjectivities fortress into which Christianity could retreat from the attacks of scientific knowledge. Such a retreat into pious subjectivity can only lead to destroying any consciousness of the truth of the Christian faith.19

The advice of the Apostle Peter serves the Christian as well today as it did 19 centuries ago. "But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fearr 3:15).

The true Christian of the 20th century has the tremendous obligation of defending his beliefs by the philosophical means available. One cannot hope to convince others of Christ if they do not begin at the hearer's level. One with faith will have little success in speaking of faith to those that have none. A common sub-strata must be fouistian is to approach his philosophical system from any perspective other than "blind faith", education will be the vehicle by which he achieves his goal. Pannenberg again says that if Christianity is to make any meaningful claim to truth, it must submit to the same procedures of testing and verification as are employed in the secular sciences.20 For too long believers have brushed aside the legitimacy of the skeptics argument that Christians heads are buried in the sand. While some accusations are totally unfounded and while the darts of derision have sometimes been hurled unjustly, perhaps some blame lies at the Christians own door. In fear of the philosophical jungle where the serpent still tempts man with forbidden "apples," in our own rebellion we have not tasted of the fruit of the garden at all. There is much in the "Educational Garden" that is good for food.

To do a justified job in apologetics will require much work. A working knowledge of Biblical Scholarship, Biblical Criticisms,21 and perhaps at least a taste of Hebrew and Greek will be needed. The serious apologist will find it necessary to employ all of tdefend his positions. In addition, seeing that apologetics are bound up within the existing culture, a knowledge of current trends and movements of the day will become vital.

A word at this point regarding the tools that are available and Biblical Scholarship. Today, as noted above, anti-Christian claims have become extremely sophisticated. Often the very tools of Christian and Biblical Scholarship have been turned against the very faith it critiques. Agnostics and critics have wll. With such a realization many have condemned the process of scholarship altogether. Many are appalled at the very notion that the Bible could be critiqued by mere man. How can man subject the word of God to the same procedures of testing and verification as the secular sciences? While this may seem to be anti-Biblical let it be noted that Biblical scholarship holds an important role. While being non-religious and in some respects stemming from the 19th century era of skepticism, it is still valid. It serves many useful purposes. Only in approaching it without fear and with an open mind can one hope to gain from its well-spring. Biblical scholarship, while being viewed as the enemy of the Christian faith, and in some cases justifiably so, is an important friend in gaining a deeper understanding of God's book. If it is believed that the Bible is God's word and that it is divine, then one need not fear any man-made tests it is subjected to. If it is not of man but of God then man's ability to critique the Bible should show that it is a book that not only equals man's writings but excels them. Scholarship should be approached cautiously but without fear.

One might ask what scholarship of this nature has to do with apologetics. The answer is simple. Scholarship is the touchstone of verifying many biblical claims. Indeed, the field of history to which most scholars and preachers appeal is bound up in this tradition. As in any arowever, one should keep an open mind and differentiate between the ridiculous and sensible. And while it may seem to be a paradox that the field which is so useful in apologetics can be the same field that Agnostics use, it should not alarm us. Every field, including science and religion, has the ability to give impetus to heresy. This is not a fault with the field but rather human nature.23

New Testament Apologetics

Now that "Apologetics" has been defined and its importance understood, it becomes the next logical step of underse in the Christian Era. What proofs, logic, and reason are used by New Testament writers and those who immediately followed? To begin such a study one must go to the text and discover the situation of the first century writers.

To a causal reader of the New Testament it might not seem as if apologetics played a leading role in its development. New Testament books, on the surface, usually do not reveal such a genre. Upon closer observation, however, it becomes clear that much of the ttical. Avrey Dulles, noted scholar in the field of apologetics, and author of the classic work, History of Apologetics, states:

While none of the New Testament writings is directly and professedly apologetical, nearly all of them contain reflections of the Church's efforts to exhibit the credibility of its message and to answer the obvious objections that would have arisen in the minds of adversaries, prospective converts, and candid believers.24

Consider the implications of the first century CE. While Christ had, indeed, promised his kingdom and had established such according to Acts 2, there would still be doubts and derision arise. Christ, a Jew by nationality, would be forced upon by His fellow countrymen to verify His claims as the Son of God. Later His disciples would be asked to do the same. And though Jesus' fellow countrymen failed on the whole to accept His claim, the miracles and prophecy He cited had divine impact upon his disciples in the first and following centuries. Again the truth is borne out that apologetics generally has its most profound effect on those who believe already.

Within this initial thrust of Christianity came the technique of proving Christ by the fulfillment of the Old Law. This became the primary essence of the New Testament's apologetical statement. It might be noted that before being an apologetic, Christianity was a message of Jesus as Messiah and Lord. As this message was proclaimed, however, it naturally gave rise to questions. How could such a one of lowly birth and upbringing be the promised Messiah?25 "Is this not the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brethren, James and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then has this man all these things? And they were offended in Him." (Matthew 13:55-57).

Such a question about the birth and lineage was answered by Paul in appealing to Old Testament Scripture (cf. Romans 1:3; Acts 13:17-23).

Questions were also raised as to how Jesus could have suffered such cruelty and could have been betrayed by one of his own. The prospective Jewish believer demanded an answer. Such being true, Jesus and his followers looked to the Old Testament prophets to prove their claims. This became the pattern for the entire New Testament period. Avrey Dulles says:

The widespread failure of the Jews to recognize Jesus as Messiah presumably constituted a major obstacle to the evangelization of Israel. In answer to this difficulty, a number of Old Testament quotations would seem to have been adduced. In addition to the Fourth Servant Song. .. the Christians appealed frequently to Isaiah 6:9-10, which describes God's binding of those who were to hear the preaching of Isaiah. The text, cited in all four Gospels and in Acts 28:26-27, was doubtless one of the pillars of the primitive apologetic.26

In the earliest Kerygmatic 27 proclamation the disciples of the church pointed to the old law and prophecy as proof of their claim. It is important to remember that in this initial setting Christianity was still viewed by many as a deviant form of Judaism. Therefore situation demanded that the proofs called upon fit within the cultural and social framework of the day. At this early point most Christians were Jews. The Gospel had not yet been preached to all nations (Mark 16:15). Even while Christianity spread it was initially taken, even by Paul the great "Pagan Evangelizer," to the Jews. Much of the New Testament calls on the Jewish readers knowledge of the Old Testament Scripture to understand its illusions. Hebrews, which has been called by Alexander B. Bruce the 'First Christian Apology', 28 and 1 Corinthians are excellent examples of such writings. To the early church the Old Testament scriptures were vital to their understanding of Jesus as both Son of God and Messiah. Verses like Acts 17:11 are illuminated when such a context is kept in mind. "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica in that they received the word with all readi-ness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”

Jewish Christians turned time and again to the tradition in which they were raised to meet arguments about the superiority of Christ, his Sonship, and his resurrection. The writers of the text felt the critical need to give the world their apology. "Parts of the New Testament such as the major Pauline letters, Hebrews, the four Gospels, and Acts—Reveal an apologetical preoccupation in the minds of the authors themselves."29 Perhaps this could best be summed up by John's statement, "But these are written that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ" (John 20:31).

Although Jews were the primary target of New Testament theology and apology, it is quite clear that the Greek Gentile world would also be encountered. This is especially significant following the Jewish rejection of this new off-shoot of its National religion. Paul's statement in Acts 13:46 is an apt expression of the sentiment of the apostle. "It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing you put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles."

With this decision the waves of apologetical tide flow out in the direction of the Greek world and toward the succeeding centuries. From this point Christian apologetics would never be the same.

Without the decision to expand the gospel and merrymaker to the Gentile world one's study of the entire field of apologetics might be rather brief. It was in this fertile soil of Greek learning that apologetics germinated. The culture of this new environment gave synthesis to the Light of the gospel. This Light synthesis (photosynthesis) would have its roots in the apostle Paul and would bloom for the next several centuries.

In a close study of the Acts of the Apostles it becomes clear that Paul was an expert in Jewish as well as Greek logic. His encounters with the Greek and Roman world point out time and time again the apostle's ability in assessing human nature and human endeavors of learning. It has been said that Paul in Acts represents the ideal Pharisee AND philosopher of the Greek world.30

Paul is one,

Who finds in Christianity the proper fulfillment of all that was good in his ancestral tradition and can therefore appeal confidently to the Jewish scriptures to vindicate his belief, and also as the exponent of a philosophical monotheism who can appeal for confirmation of his preaching to the utterances of the Greek poets. This double claim, that Christianity is the truth to which both the scriptures and the insights of the philosophers directly lead, is a starting-point for the arguments of the Apologists, but they develop its implications and they provide it with a theological rationale.31

Paul uses all of his techniques to bring the gospel to all the world. Acts is replete with examples of apostolic apologetic statements. Some good indications of the apologetic elements are found in not only Paul's words but also in Stephen's defense (Acts 7), Peter's apology to Cornelius (Acts 10), and perhaps the most famous is Paul's address to the cultured Greeks of Athens (Acts 17).32 Paul's areopagite address resounds with techniques later to be used by great apologists. F. F. Bruce says, "In several respects Paul's Areopagitica anticipates the Christian apologies of the 2nd Century."33

A final note before entering the "unholy ground" of the Patristic Era is that the first century was a difficult time in the spread of the message of Jesus Christ. This time period was filled with persecution, hardship and poverty. Paul, himself, lists his perils for Christ (2 Corinthians 11). It was also a time when Christianity met its opponents head-on. Both Judaism and Paganism were fiercely battled. Yet in the face of tremendous difficulty the new sect grew at a phenomenal rate. This growth of the early church was directly attributed to the work of the Holy Spirit and a personal conviction by individual Christians to teach the gospel to the entire world even as they were scattered. It was also from this humble apostolic kerygmatic beginning that some of the greatest logic of all time would arise.

The Patristic Era and Beyond 
As we have seen, apologetics for the Christian faith had their roots in the Hebrew scriptures. Jesus and the early apostles referenced them time and again to prove that the new era they were ushering in was not a mere division off the old but a New Age altogether. The Christian Age had been advented. We have also seen that as the kerygma of Jesus was taught it gradually came in contact with the "Civilized Greek World." With this turn of events came a whole new apologetical discourse. Apologetics would become something far different than they had ever been before. No longer would Christianity appeal only to Jewish tradition and law to prove Christ's claim. Classical Greek logic would be employed. This was a first for no such thorough attempt to analyze and interpret the significance of the Christian faith had hither to been made.34 A bright theological sunrise could be seen peeping over the cultural horizon. The air of learning, however, though brisk with excitement, was not without storm clouds. While the succeeding generations would produce some of the most skilled minds in defending the truth it would also at the exact same time produce some of the most divisive action against the Church of the first century. With a complexity of logic came a complexity of theology. The end result would be a new form of Christianity far different than that taught by Christ or his initial followers. Division in spite of the great minds of the day would be inevitable. 

With this as the backdrop, we now turn to the Patristic era. As time and space would not allow for a comprehensive study only major events and individuals will be discussed.

It is very important to note that Apologists of the post-Apostolic era did not arrive at their thoughts with radical change. It was a slow process. Metamorphosis of the field itself underwent a fermentation period. "The main lines of their defense of Christianity and their commendation of it to the world of their time . . . had already been adumbrated, more especially in the New Testament books themselves."35

As theologians and apologists came and went each built upon the foundation of preceding generations. G. P. Fisher says that systematic Christian theology basically begins with the work of Greek Apologists of the second century.'