Apologetics
And Scripture

What is the relationship of Scripture and apologetics? Some believe all of Scripture is an apology for the Christian faith. Others believe Scripture is the way of salvation and Christian life, but it is not an apologetical tool. After all, the Bible is not a collection of rational propositions which translate into a belief system. You cannot lay out the system and have folks scratch their chins and say: I see the logic in it and I believe. Faith is the key to Christianity, a reasonable faith to be sure, but faith not reason as its basis.

Apologetics is not a Biblical word. John Frame, a contemporary Reformed defender of the faith, says this about apologetics and Scripture:

The Bible does not discuss apologetics as an academic discipline, but it does speak about defending the faith. The term apologetics comes from the Greek word apologia, apologeisthai, which in the NT usually refers to an individual’s defense of his conduct, as 1 Cor. 9:3, sometimes against legal charges, as in Acts 19:33; 22:1; 24:10. In the Acts passages, however, Paul defends himself by defending his message. So, in Phil. 1: 7, 16, apologia refers explicitly to a defense of the Gospel, in 1 Pet. 3:15, to a defense of the Christian hope.
Kevin Vanhoozer, ed, Dictionary for the Theological Interpretation of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2005), pp. 57-8.

So, even if the “reasoned defense” language is missing from Scripture, Frame argues that there is Biblical warrant for apologetics. Therefore, defending the faith is a Biblical practice and primarily theological in nature.

So, the difficulty seems to be in how we frame apologetic/Biblical arguments. The Bible gives clear teaching on the life of Jesus, His death and resurrection, justification by faith, and living the Christian life. But, not so concerning apologetic arguments. So, as in all things interpretive, there are differences giving birth to pre-suppositionalists (à la John Frame) and evidentialists (à la John Gerstner). The former begin with God and the latter end with God in their apologetics.

Frame would press upon the non-believer that God is revealed in nature but suppressed by man. He would state his case in a Biblical worldview that presents the Gospel using Scripture as the lead. The Bible and its theological implications would be the basis of bringing the atheist to light. Gerstner, on the other hand, would say Scripture is not an apology for atheists. Scripture assumes God and atheists assume there is no God. Therefore the Biblical argument, without independent truth of Scripture, does away with God and the Bible. All men know the world before Scripture. Therefore arguments must be made to show how God and Scripture make sense in the world of the atheist.

Noted Reformed scholar Paul Helm opines that it is a mistake to argue for a “system of apologetics”. No where in Scripture is there a revealed apologetic system. Helm claims apologetics is a tactic and spreading the Gospel is a strategy. The tactics can and does change as per one’s audience. Sometimes it works to use pre-suppositions. Sometimes it works to use evidence. Helm defines apologetics as

…the business of making space—intellectual, cultural, religious space for the Gospel to do its work. It aims to remove prejudices, mistakes, misinformation, willful ignorance of the Gospel, to start from where people are, to utilize a “point of contact”.

The space made and point of contact may be with or without the Bible and God at the beginning. Your presentation of a defense is person and culture driven. There is one Gospel and what counts is that truth is proclaimed and that it receives a hearing. It is incumbent on the apologist to be able as a pre-suppositionalist and an evidentialist. That is how we can always be ready to give an answer.