Note: If you have not signed up to join my blog email list, please click on “contact” above and send me your name and email address. You will receive notices when I post a new blog and avoid missing future blog posts in this and other series. I do not share email addresses.
Part Four: What Benefits Do Offensive Apologetic Tactics Have over Defensive Apologetics?
In my previous three blogs, I described what offensive apologetics is and why it’s an effective tactic when engaging the confirmed unbeliever. Beginning with this week’s blog—and the following two blogs—I’ll suggest specific benefits of offensive apologetic tactics over defensive apologetics, particularly as an initial response to skeptics and other critics. (See part two to review defensive apologetic tactics.)
First Benefit: Boomerang Questions.
Continuing to apply the Socratic Method described in part one as an offensive apologetics tactic, this approach entails responding to challenges by asking the same kinds of questions critics ask Christians: How do they explain the presence of pain and suffering? How do they know their holy books are true revelation? How do they know their religion is true when it contradicts other religions that also claim to be true? and so on. As theologian Alister McGrath put it, “Too often, those who ask critical questions of evangelicalism fail to realize that those same critical questions need to be addressed within their own ranks as well.” (A Passion for Truth, 22)
Most non-Christians take their worldview presuppositions for granted. It’s an eye-opener when unbelievers discover they can’t answer the very critical questions they ask Christians. This may leave the door wide open for us to explain the Christian position on the topic under discussion.
I’ll illustrate this technique by presenting examples of typical questions unbelievers ask Christians. Notices all the Christian responses are designed to challenge unbelievers to respond to the very issues they raise.
Unbeliever: “You Christians can’t prove what you believe!”
Christian: “Then why don’t you prove what you believe!”
Unbeliever: “How do know the Bible is true?”
Christian: “How do you know your holy book is true?”
Unbeliever: “You Christians are so narrow-minded. You only think your religion is true!”
Christian: “Does your view make you narrow-minded? How does being narrow-minded make something untrue?”
Unbeliever: “If a woman wants an abortion, it’s her right to do whatever she wants with her own body.”
Christian: “If a baby is a human being, why wouldn’t it have the same right to live as the mother?”
Unbeliever: “We don’t need a God to set standards of good and evil. People can make their own moral choices.”
Christian “Then if I someone believes sex with children is acceptable, would you agree?”
The purpose of these kinds of “boomerang” questions is to point out that the same questions unbelievers think will stumble Christians they cannot consistently resolve themselves. People seldom think through their own beliefs. Religious and secular presuppositions are usually just taken for granted to be true. The right boomerang questions force unbelievers to rethink their assumptions. When they do this, they may be more willing to listen to Christian alternatives. And as I’ve demonstrated in my revised and expanded edition of Defending Your Faith; Reliable Answers for a New Generation of Seekers and Skeptics (Kregel Publications, 2019), Christians can justify their beliefs. ©
Next week we’ll see that apologetics on the offense can reduce complicated questions to a manageable size.