Well, if I'm going to talk about Apologetics. Yes I should start by apologizing. I'm a Christian. I know it's really really hard to believe that Christianity is true, but I happen to feel that way. Can't really expect you to feel that way.


I wish Christianity made more sense but sometimes you just got to ignore logic and take a leap in the dark. Bible is very old book and I can see why you might find it confusing, maybe even boring. I certainly don't expect you to believe everything in it. 


Even though I well, I happen to be a Christian. I can't really give you any good reason to be one and sorry even bothered you and brought up the subject. I apologize. But well, I'm a Christian. Now is the way I've been talking about Christian Apologetics is that simply apologizing for being a Christian? No, Christian Apologetics is not about being apologetic for your Christianity. It's not saying, Oh, I'm so sorry. I know it sounds offensive.I know. It sounds stupid. But it's just one of those weird things about me that I happen to be Christian. 


The noun Apologetics is very different from the adjective, apologetic. If we talked about being apologetic as an adjective, the dictionary says that that means we're sorry or regretful or eager to apologize or embarrassed. Now Christian Apologetics is not about being embarrassed or sorry or regretful about your Christian faith. Apologetics. 


The noun is the branch of theology concerned with the defense and rational justification of Christianity. We believe Christianity to be true, we believe that it makes good sense to be a Christian. And Apologetics is showing how it makes sense. John frame defines Christian Apologetics as a field of Christian theology that aims to present a rational basis for the Christian faith, to defend the faith against objections and expose the perceived flaws of other worldviews.


And so far from being apologetic. And sorry for being a Christian. Apologetics is about defending the faith and showing how Christianity makes more sense than its competitors. Now, there are a variety of barriers to belief, and I'll mention just a few that Apologetics sometimes deals with, is there any evidence that God is real? A person might say, I don't see any evidence. I don't see God. I don't hear him. I don't feel him. I see no reason whatsoever to believe God is real. 


How do you respond to that? Others might say, well, faith, that seems unscientific, it seems like kind of a matter of wishful thinking. It doesn't really have any connection with reality. It just is connected to what you want to believe that makes you feel good. Some might say, well, miracles, those are impossible. We know there are laws of nature, and miracles, by definition, are violating the laws of nature. So how could anybody believe in miracles? For this one, how could a good all powerful God allow so much suffering in the world? 


There can't be a good explanation for that? Aren't all the major religions pretty much alike? Aren't the founders of those religions? Very similar? Didn't they all have the same goal in the end? And why would you want to pick Christianity as better than some other religion? Isn't it arrogant to see Jesus as the way, the only way? How can you be so arrogant as to say that? Why would I become a Christian when so many churchgoers are hypocrites? And the list of challenges and barriers and objections could go on and on? And one aspect of Apologetics is to listen to the complaints, questions, objections, barriers that people have, and to try to help them deal with those things and to see why they should become a Christian. So as we think about Apologetics, we're not going to be apologetic about it.


I want to talk about Unapologetic, Apologetics. In the Scripture we see that Jesus himself when he talked with opponents would stump them. The Bible says that marveling at his answer, they became silent. They no longer dared to ask him any questions. Sometimes Jesus would give such a good answer that they would just be stunned. Other times he would answer a question with a question that put them on the spot. And so Jesus was a very brilliant conversationalist who could stomp those who are trying to trap Him. And Jesus followers, even though they were fishermen, even though they didn't have a formal education could really astound their opponents when they proclaim the truth about Jesus. 


The Bible says that they told their opponents there is no other name under heaven, given among men by which we must be saved. And the Bible says, when they saw the courage, the boldness of Peter and John and realize they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished, and they took note that these men had been with Jesus, that was the key. They were bold, and they were brilliant in their clock proclamation. Stephen was challenged and even attacked, and he was caught in an argument with some very educated and knowledgeable people. 


But the Bible says they couldn't withstand the wisdom and the spirit with which Stephen was speaking. And so we're not apologetic in our presentation of the faith. We are bold and speaking the faith, and we show that it is true, and that it's reasonable and that it's powerful. The Apostle Paul was accused by Governor Festus of being crazy. He listened to Paul for a while. And then when Paul got to talking about the resurrection of Jesus Christ, Festus thought that was the craziest thing that he'd ever heard and Festus said, You are insane. Paul, your great learning has driven you mad. And how did Paul respond? He said, I'm not insane, most excellent Festus he was still very respectful. What I'm saying is true, and reasonable. That in a nutshell, is Apologetics. You're saying that something is true. And you're saying that it's reasonable. Paul was not ashamed. He says, I'm not ashamed of the gospel, for it's the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes. 


Now Paul wrote this to the city of Rome. And Paul, himself was often harassed, often mocked often and thrown into prison. He was part of a very small minority who believed this Christian message. And it might have been something that others wondered, why isn't that guy embarrassed to believe such nonsense? And Paul says, No, I'm not ashamed. I will preach to the most powerful city on Earth, and say that I'm not ashamed of the gospel, because it's God's power to save everyone who believes. Paul also wrote, walk in wisdom towards outsiders, making the best use of the time, let your speech always be gracious season with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person. Apologetics is knowing how to answer a person who was an outsider and to help that person to learn the truth of the faith. 


Now, some Christians agree that we shouldn't be apologetic or embarrassed. But they still say that we shouldn't get involved in Apologetics defending and reasoning, and arguing for the faith. At least Christians aren't ashamed of the gospel, and they are eager to witness boldly but they don't think that Christians should resort to reasoning and evidence. Christians should simply proclaim God's truth from Scripture plainly and boldly, and be confident that the gospel has power and that God will accomplish his purpose through the gospel. 


They say that getting evidence for Christianity is at best, useless and at worst, wrong, and harmful. Now let's think about that for a moment is Apologetics wrong? Some Christians, attack Apologetics and they say that Apologetics depends too much on human reasoning, not divine revelation. We cannot know the things of God simply by reasoning our way up to him, he has to reveal himself. And this is true. We cannot know God unless he reveals himself to us. But is it necessarily true that Apologetics then just depends entirely on human reasoning? I'm teaching a course in Apologetics. I'm talking about Apologetics. So I obviously don't believe that all Apologetics is bad. 


But I do want to admit that there can be the danger of relying way too much on just human kinds of thinking, and not enough on what God has revealed. Here's another objection, evidence and argument treat God as a theory for debate, or as a thing for analysis and not as a person to be trusted and adored.


Don't make God just some theory or some thing. He's not just an idea to be debated. He's not just an insect that you can take as a specimen and dissect and look at the different parts and analyze. He's God. He's a person. He's to be adored. You're to put your faith in Him. And so some people who oppose apologetic, say Apologetics gets people on the wrong track right away because it treats God as an uncertain theory to be discussed, or it's just a thing rather than an overwhelming reality. 


Now, again, I agree that there can be danger in treating God just as a theory, or as a thing. And we shouldn't do that. But there may be approaches to Apologetics that don't require us to do that. Here's another objection debates about God can inflate pride and make a human, the judge of God. And the bad starting point can't lead to a good result. If you're going to try to persuade a person, that God is real, and that person should respond to God, you're in a sense, setting that person up in the position of authority and as the judge, and you need to let them know that God is their judge. 


They're not the ones who get to sit around and decide whether God is acceptable to them. So these are some of the objections that even some Christians have against Apologetics. Now, it's very clear, as I've already said that there can be dangerous and doing some of this. And so we need to make sure that we don't depend just on human argument, or that we treat God as a thing, whether we become proud ourselves in presenting the faith or that we encourage somebody else to be the proud rationalistic judge of whether God is worth believing in. Nonetheless, having recognized those dangers, I don't believe that Apologetics is wrong because the Bible shows people engaging in Apologetics. And we'll say more about some of that in a moment. Should we just preach the gospel? What God do the rest? Well, by all means, do preach the gospel by all means do rely on God. 



But sometimes it's helpful to give people reasons and to help them deal with the objections and the questions that they're struggling with. Is the evidence useless? This is another thing that some people think about Christianity who are Christians themselves, they say, well, we should avoid Apologetics because it's just a waste of time. It's useless to debate someone with a non Christian worldview, because that non Christian with a non Christian worldview has ideas that are rooted in their ungodly heart commitments, and in hidden assumptions that they have about reality, or they also call these presuppositions and you can't help somebody with bad presuppositions and a wrong worldview and an ungodly heart they just plain have to be born again. And no amount of other explanation or evidence will help them. Also, we shouldn't give unbelievers the impression that if they convert, they could keep their worldview mostly intact, and just add Jesus to it. 


They need radical rebirth, a new heart, new presuppositions, a new worldview, and any attempt to do anything else, it's just a waste of time, it's useless. Now, I believe that there are deep presuppositions that people hold assumptions that they don't even realize that they hold but just take for granted. And those sometimes need to be uncovered and dealt with. And I also believe that one of the biggest obstacles to faith is simply having an ungodly heart commitment to yourself, or to other falsehoods. And it's not just a matter if only they have the right explanation, all of the well there are ungodly heart commitments, hidden assumptions, deep seated worldviews, and we must have radical rebirth. 


But evidence can in some cases with some people, be helpful. And so we can deal with presuppositions, but we can also at times, deal with evidence in giving evidence we see in the Bible itself, Paul reasoned with them. He reasoned with them from the scriptures, explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead here, Paul is talking with Jewish people who believe the Old Testament Scriptures, and so he's using portions from their own scriptures, to show that Jesus had to suffer and rise again. 


He didn't just do that with Jewish people. And just with the Scriptures, it says he also, he reasoned in the synagogue as well as in the marketplace, day by day. And he did this and he reasoned in the synagogue, trying to persuade Jews and Greeks, he also was reasoning and persuading them about the kingdom of God. And in this city, he was reasoning daily in the School of Tyrannus which would have been a non Jewish school, and he was trying to reason and persuade. 


Paul argued, we see it in the Bible, he argued for Jesus's resurrection. He didn't just proclaim it. He argued for it. He stated that there were hundreds of eyewitnesses to the risen Jesus who were still alive, and who could testify about what they had seen. So he's giving rational evidence that Jesus is alive, namely, eyewitness testimony of many, many people. 



The Apostle Peter said, but in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord, always be ready to make A defense and that word make a defense is a translation of the Greek word apologia. Always be ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior and Christ may be ashamed of their slander. 


So be ready. Be ready to explain the reason for the hope that you have and do it with the right kind of attitude with gentleness and respect. That's Apologetics, giving reasons and doing it in a manner that is kindly and winsome. Unapologetic, Apologetics has at least four elements that I want to highlight. One is it involves dialogue, talking together, reasoning together, listening, and learning to talk and other person's language. Part of communicating the gospel is simply speaking in the language and in the figures of speech and with the examples that other people can understand and relate to and grasp. And the only way you can relate other people is by being in conversation with them and dialogueng with them and understanding. And so dialogue and talking back and forth is a big part of Apologetics. Another part is defense, removing obstacles and objections that might keep people from taking Christianity seriously. Some people long ago might have thought Christianity was immoral, or that it was totally illogical. 


And some still today may say, oh, Christianity is immoral, because for example, it teaches that sex is only between a married man and woman. And that's so narrow, it is so bigoted, it is so intolerant, and it is immoral, to be bigoted, and narrow and intolerant. So there is an argument against Christianity that it is immoral in that sense. And there can be many other kinds of charges as well, or that it doesn't fit the laws of logic. And so we need to be able to remove the obstacles and the objections.



Another aspect is to simply clarify and to correct misunderstandings that people have about the faith. Back in the early centuries of the church, Christians were charged with being atheists, with being cannibals, with being our archivists and traders who wanted to overthrow the government, they were accused of being atheists, because they didn't believe in all of the different Greek gods and goddesses and all the Roman gods and goddesses. 


They believed in the One God so they had to explain now, it's not that we're atheists and don't believe in any god, we believe in the one God who created all things. They are accused of being cannibals because it was rumored that they ate Body and Blood and they drank the blood of babies and a baby flesh. And so they had to explain, Well, we take part in something called the Lord's Supper, but it doesn't involve murdering babies and chewing on their flesh and drinking their blood. It is a memorial and a participation in our Christ who died and rose again, and were actually just eating bread and drinking wine. And this had to be clarified. When they were accused of being anarchists who simply wanted to get rid of the government. 



They said, No, no, no, no, no, we pray for the Emperor, we pray for those who are in authority over us. And we encourage people to give honor to those who deserve honor, we encourage them to pay taxes to whom taxes are due. But we don't worship the government. We don't worship the Emperor. But we're not encouraging anybody to overthrow the government or the Emperor. So in these ways, they would clarify. And still today, there are many misunderstandings of Christianity, that apologist simply need to say, no, no, no, no, that's not what Christianity and the Bible teaches.


I'm glad I had an opportunity to correct that. I'll just take another example of clarification. During a trip to Africa, I visited a particular place where they were showing various statues of the gods that were worshiped. And they showed a god of thunder, a God of this, a God of that. And then the guy said, and now here's the Holy Trinity. That statue is God, the Father, that statue is marry his wife, and that statue is their son, Jesus, and that's the Holy Trinity. Now, that is not the Holy Trinity. 


The Holy Trinity is not three statues in the first place, because God is Spirit and the second place, Mary is not the second person of the Trinity. Now, there is some reason to think that at times, Christians were misunderstood as teaching that as the doctrine of the Trinity. And so if, let's say a Muslim said, I don't believe that doctor, the Trinity I don't believe that the father and Mary had a baby together and that those are the three persons of the Trinity and have say, Well, I agree with you. Mary is not the second person to Trinity and the father did not have physical relations with her.


So we we clarify ways that certain Christian teachings could be misunderstood. And then a fourth aspect of Apologetics is to give a positive case, to take Christianity seriously reasons to believe one kind of making of a positive case is just getting various evidences, it might be in the form of an argument. It might be in a discussion of archaeology, of manuscripts give a couple of examples of that. 


For a while, people were very skeptical about the Bible accounts of Jesus some got so skeptical that they wouldn't even believe a real person named Jesus had ever existed. And others would say, well, we have no record whatsoever that anybody named Pontius Pilate was ever, the Procurator, the governor of Judea. And so we think the Bible is just wrong about that. There's no evidence for it whatsoever. Pontius Pilate is not mentioned in any Roman records, there is no evidence at all. Now an apologist could say, well, yeah, but there's lots of people for whom we don't have any evidence or written records anymore. The guy lived 2000 years ago, Pontius Pilate did and not everybody who lived 2000 years ago, left a paper trail that made it to the present time. 


That is one way of arguing and there are a lot of people who didn't leave any archaeological artifacts behind. In this particular case, though, that charge was made for a while.


But now apologists can say, well, you know what, some people were digging, and they found a monument with a stone inscription that said Pontius Pilatos on it. It said Pontius Pilate, we literally have his name written in stone, from the time that he was said to be the governor of Galilee. 



So we have absolute proof positive that Pontius Pilate was a real person who was governing in that time when Jesus died. And so where such evidence exists, it's sometimes helpful for an apologist to be aware of it. Or here's another example, the Gospel of John was said to have been written hundreds of years after Jesus probably in the two hundreds. 


And the reason given was that the theology was so highly developed. And it was treating Jesus as God, from the very first sentence, you know, in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, they couldn't possibly have thought that in the first century, it couldn't possibly have been written by Jesus's own follower, John had to be written a few 100 years later, when Christians were making up this stuff about Jesus. 


Well, some people were rummaging around, and they found a fragment of the Gospel of John, that was dated to the year 125. In Egypt, which means that by 125 AD, the Gospel of John was considered scripture, and was being copied, and copies of it had already spread to Egypt. And so the Gospel itself must have been written considerably earlier than that. And we have absolute proof positive, that the Gospel of John was written much, much earlier than any of the skeptics thought, and that it's high theology of Jesus as God was very, very early. And so these are cases of providing evidence for Christian truth. Another aspect of making positive cases, just coherence, how do things hang together? 


How do they fit together, the truths of Christianity hold together and are consistent with each other, they hold together with the things we know about reality, and make sense of a lot of things. And also related to that is explanatory power. The truth that God created everything and that he created our minds, for instance, gives us a reason to believe that our minds are going to have something that corresponds to the way things are out there. If you believe that the mind is a randomly evolved, a blob of tissue, the brain, and that's all it is where the electrons firing randomly, you have no reason to have any confidence in the mind whatsoever. 


And so Christianity, and its doctrine of creation makes a lot more sense of having confidence in the human mind than the evolutionary alternative. That's just an example of making an argument from the explanatory power of Christianity, how it explains things that we know better than the alternatives, explain them. 


So those are four aspects of Apologetics dialogue, defending, clarifying and making a positive case for the truth of the Christian faith. Now in all of this, we want to realize that there are some dangers in Apologetics I already mentioned a few moments ago, that some Christians even feel you shouldn't get into Apologetics because it can go wrong so easily. But let's grant that there are some dangers as we tried to dialogue and defend and clarify and present a positive case. We might try to change the biblical gospel to suit a person's preferences or current trends.


The Gospel we come up with in that case might seem more believable to the person but it's not worth believing. We have to be very aware that if we try to suit the truth of the Bible to people's preferences, we may be betraying the truth of God's Word. Some people try to make the early chapters of the Bible, the first chapters of Genesis, and interpret them in a way that fits perfectly with Darwinian evolution. Well, that may make the Bible more believable to people who are dyed in the wool evolutionists. But what if evolution is false? 


Then we've just sold out and betrayed the faith. Skilled apologists may be tempted to pride, an intellectual arrogance toward on Christians or toward believers with a simple fate if you're smart, and you know a lot. There's the temptation to get your nose in the air to get Snoopy, to think you're better than others, and to say, Oh, they just believe it on faith and I know my stuff I'm so superior. Well, that is not the way the Lord wants us to use Apologetics to get a sense of superiority. Here's another danger of Apologetics especially if you're a skilled apologist, it's deadly to rest your faith on merely human arguments. 


The Apostle Paul said he wanted people's faith to rest not on man's wisdom, but on God's power. And Christianity is not just knowing this and that fact, it's knowing Christ. One of the great apologists of the last century was CS Lewis. And he said that it is sometimes dangerous to be successful as an apologist. He said, No Doctrine of the Faith seems to me so unreal, as the one that I have just successfully defended in a public debate just when he won the debate. 


That article of faith seems unreal to him. For a moment, you see, it has seemed to rest on oneself. As a result, when you go away from that debate, your believe seems no stronger than that weak pillar of your own arguments. That's why we apologists take our lives in our hands, and can be saved only by falling back continually from the web of our own arguments into the reality from Christian Apologetics into Christ himself. When you are a Christian, you rest in Christ, not in your own arguments, you may argue, briefly and temporarily, to just help somebody else, take Christianity more seriously and give it a hearing, that you know yourself that you depend entirely on Christ. So beware, when you're succeeding, as an apologist, always fall back from your arguments into the reality of Jesus.


Pascal was another person like Lewis, who was extremely brilliant, and had some excellent rational arguments to make for the Christian faith. But he made this point we only know God through Jesus Christ, the Christians, God does not merely consist of a God, who is the author of mathematical truths, and the order of the elements. That's the notion of the heathen. 


The God of the Christians is a God of love, and consolation. A danger of Apologetics is to turn God into some sort of thinking machine or some sort of formula. And what you end up proving, is not really the God of the Bible, and the God of Jesus Christ at all. And so we've got to recognize those extreme limits of Apologetics and realize who we really love, and who we really belong to. What is the value of Apologetics? Well, let me just mention two very simple basic things. One is that it helps some non Christians to take Christian claims more seriously. 


They may have questions or objections that they think prove Christianity can't be true. And if you can show those questions and objections to be solvable, and show that they're not a problem, after all, then you've gotten the barrier out of the way, and they can take Christian claims more seriously. Another value of Apologetics is that it does help some Christians to remain confident in the face of challenges. If you're a new Christian, and you hear some brilliant atheists attacking the faith, or some very smart person from another religion, you may still hold on to Christ, but you may feel shaken a little bit and your mind may get a little bit dizzy because you're not sure how to answer those kinds of things.


And if you have someone who is gifted in Apologetics that helps you with those answers, then it helps you to remain confident in the face of those challenges. So Apologetics can be of some help to certain non Christians and also of help to some Christians. What are the limits of Apologetics? That's important to know? Well, for one thing, often the very best arguments and evidence in the whole world. 


Don't persuade the person. There are many people no matter how well you use Apologetics who won't find the evidence persuasive and if there are to be one of the face at all. It will be by something besides mere Apologetics is not fact most people become Christians without a whole lot of help from Apologetics. So some people, if you just testify to the faith, if you just share your own personal testimony, if you direct them to the Bible, that's enough, and they hear it and the power of God ceases them and they become Christians. That's not to say Apologetics is bad, it's just to say, a good deal of the time something else has more power and influence in a person's life. And so there's limits. And not everybody needs Apologetics. 


Here's another fact, belief based on a direct encounter with God, as you hear his word as his spirit comes to you. And you sense his reality. You sense his presence, when you have that kind of a direct encounter, you don't need further proof. When you're talking to a friend in the same room, and you realize that you're talking to him, you don't need proofs that he's real, is there and you know it, and you're interacting. And if you have a relationship with a living God, and he has impressed his reality on you, you don't need some philosopher, to show me that God is real. God Himself has shown you that he's real. And that's good enough. 


Another aspect of this is that Apologetics deals more in the realm of analysis and speculation, the whole logic of speculative thought is different from the logic of personal relations. We who are Christians have a knowledge of God by personal acquaintance, and by the delight that we have in God. And those are almost out of bounds. In some ways, when we're into an apologetic debate, we're dealing with the other person's way of seeing things and with what they find persuasive. And just telling them how you've encountered God may help them, but it might not. 


But whatever helps or doesn't help. The fact is this, the logic of the kinds of things you do in Apologetics is quite different from the riches of an actual relationship with God. And when you're getting into apologetic discussion, you may be very limited in the kinds of things you're talking about. Don't forget to bring in the knowledge that you have, by personal testimony and by personal acquaintance with God, if that's going to help the person. So Apologetics can be helpful in some cases, but not at all and there are limits to it. So when should we answer when Shouldn't we? Well, let's go to a verse in the Bible about this. It says, answer, not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself. 


The very next verse says, Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes. Well, which is it? Do I answer him? Or don't I? Well, the wise answer to that is, it depends. It depends on the person and on the situation. If you've got a person who doesn't know what he doesn't know, then you have to decide whether in trying to answer him you're going to become like him and become foolish like him, or whether he's going to be real wise in his own eyes. 


If you don't have an answer for him. Sometimes, a non Christian will go around thinking he's intellectually superior, if you can poke a hole in that, and show that Christians actually are pretty smart, and that Christians have good reasons for what they believe, then you've answered the fool according to his folly, and he can't be quite so wise in his own eyes, and he may have to take you seriously. On the other hand, if you're going to start changing your gospel to suit him, some of the worst heresies in Christianity have come from apologists who were trying to make the faith more believable to non Christians, but simply ended up making the faith more non Christian. 


Friedrich Schleiermacher was the founder of modern liberalism, which rejected many miracles and much else that is absolutely vital to the Christian gospel, and it was done in the name of making Christianity appeal to its culture. despises he answered the fools according to their folly, but became a fool himself theologically. 


So answer when you think it will help and when the other person seems open to the truth, don't answer if it's just a messy quarrel and the other person isn't open, and really willing to learn anyway. Or if you find yourself sliding into their worldview, and starting to reshape your Christianity to suit them. Now, the fact in all of this is that Apologetics doesn't save anybody. God saves only the Lord gives life. And yet, there may be a role for Apologetics do what you can, as God directs you. I heard an apologist A while back, who compared to this to the story of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead. In that story, Jesus says, Take away the stone. 


So they took away the stone. Jesus cried out with a loud voice Lazarus, come out. The man who had died came out his hands and feet bound with linen strips, and his face wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, unbind him and let him go. Now in that story, notice what the people do. Jesus says take away the stone, so they take away the stone. Jesus says, Get rid of those bindings and wrappers and take them off. So they do that. But they can't say Lazarus come out and have the dead man come out. And so it isn't Apologetics we cannot make dead souls come to life. 


Again, only the Lord can do that. But maybe we can get rid of a stone here or there. Maybe we can take off some grave clothes here or there. Apologetics can remove obstacles and prepare for the moment that God gives life. We roll away a stone that is blocking things, and then God can call the person out. And let's never forget that we're only moving a stone. We're not the ones giving the life. 


And once God has given life Apologetics can help the new Christian Apologetics can unbind Christians from their grades close. It can take off the questions and hang ups that still haunt them or that still hinder them. And so as we engage in Christian Apologetics, let's pray that God will help us to roll away a stone here and there, that he'll help us to unwrap some useless and hindering grave clothes here and there. But above all, let us pray that the Lord of life will say to those people who are trying to reach come for come alive and live




Last modified: Thursday, March 2, 2023, 7:51 AM