I see a concerning trend coming out of surveys of Gen Z: that apologetics was used in the church to create a divisive atmosphere between Christians and non-Christians. In other words, this field of knowledge was weaponized. This situation should never have happened.
My own story:
When I first found apologetics, I was so excited to see that there was a rich body of thought dating back thousands of years in offering a case for Christianity. It was an intellectually rigorous tradition, with some of the world’s greatest thinkers, including philosophers and scientists of many differing backgrounds. I was excited, because I had encountered so much of the cultural mantra that lauded Christians as anti-intellectual, non-inquisitive, and outright stupid. And that is a real and fashionable cultural view of Christianity. It’s an unreasonable and marginalizing view of people of faith.
So, at first, I had a reflexive reaction to show people that it wasn’t the Christians who were disingenuous about the tough questions. I was going to show that Christianity had robust intellectualism whereas atheism was the view that was shallow and leaning on blind faith. There was enough material out there to build up, not only my view, but also my ego. And build my ego, it did. When I started out in ministry, I labelled it as an “apologetics and discernment ministry.” I debated with people online and in person, which afforded me some basic skill with arguments (*some). But a little success can build a big head.
I quickly began to realize that I didn’t like the tone I was taking. I grew discontent and reframed the ministry to exclude “discernment.” What did I know of discernment? I was relatively young in the study of this important work, The Bible. I was just beginning the journey of understanding pain, suffering, loss and healing through the lens of the Bible and God rather than working through these things on my own.
When I looked more carefully at what Jesus and the disciples were teaching, there was no room for hubris. They deeply cared for and loved the people around them. They were willing to suffer harm to their bodies and reputations in order to share deep truths of Christianity. Further, the disciples were immediately given the “smack down”[1] by Jesus when they tried to figure out who was the greatest among them.
I began to discover that I enjoyed the feeling of “being right” in an argument. It makes me nauseous to think of how very wrong it is to enjoy that feeling. This attitude is not present in how Jesus engaged the ideological commitments of others…ever…even for a moment.
The current situation:
Over the years, I’ve noticed some public speakers point to how Jesus flipped tables in the temple courtyard to justify their own aggressive proclamation of truth. However, the same people rarely comment on how Jesus wanted to gather up the people of Jerusalem into his arms:
“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.” (Matthew 23:37) This is loving imagery of a mother caring for her children, not of a sword-wielding soldier cutting down enemies with truth. Yet, look at who Jesus references as wanting to “gather up” here: basically, even the worst of people, such as the murderers.
For us humans, there is a tension to be learned in the commitment to truth while still loving those around us…even those who do the worst things. Notice the compassion of Jesus, his love, even in the midst of error and falsehoods. Notice his response to the destruction of life all around him. As God, he has the ultimate right to judge all of this evil, but He shows us righteousness combined with mercy.
In accordance with recent surveys of Gen Z, we have unfortunately taught a generation that being able to wield truth as a sword to cut people down is more important than ministering to them.[2] That teaching is explicitly rejected by the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 13:1-6. He admonishes that if one understands all mysteries and all knowledge—and even has “all faith so as to move mountains”—but doesn’t have love…that person is nothing. He didn’t say that person is “misguided,” or “in error.” He said, they are “nothing.” He made it personal, too, so he couldn’t escape his own teaching.
We have unfortunately taught a generation that it is more important to have the answers than to be curious. Jesus understands how very little we actually know, and he encourages us to come to Him with an attitude of curiosity and humility as seen in Matthew 19: 14, “Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
We have the opportunity to help set things back on a better path. We can share the reality of our modest knowledge by continuing to place learning as a high priority in our individual lives. We can recognize our desire to get quick sound byte answers, rather than engage in thoughtful and lengthy consideration. We can place the self-sacrificing love towards others as a goal for our Christian life. None of these things require agreement with falsehoods or errors in reasoning. But all require the love described by Paul in 1 Corinthians 13:4-8
“Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.”
[1] An outdated colloquialism from the 1980’s or 1990’s…but I’m still using it!
[2] These “unfortunately taught” statements are generalizations in response to surveys of Gen Z indicating their view of apologetics. For example, see The Gospel Coalition article: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/things-frustrate-gen-z/