Introductory Review

So far in the sketch of apologetics given in 1 Peter we have covered four things. 1) Apologetics is a Christian duty. 2) It has a relentless quality that is founded on 3) the ultimate presupposition of belief in Christ as Lord. And 4) it has a logical nature. Think with me for a moment on how each of these is found in the classic text. That it is a Christian duty is self-evident in 1 Peter 3:15 (you give an answer of your hope) and it is explicit in the bearing of "all of you" (3:8) on all that follows including answer giving. The relentless quality derives from the phrase, "always prepared." We are immediately directed to the ultimate presupposition by the way the passage opens: "as Lord, set apart Christ in your hearts." Belief in and submission to the Lordship of Christ envelops the entire project of apologetics. The logical nature of this task comes from the word translated "give an answer" (NIV). It is the word apologia, a defense with strong tones of argument and counter argument where one party is trying to make some claim stick while another party is trying to make it un-stick. This implies the logical process of trying to reach conclusions by means of premises (or evidence). It implies trying to do so consistently because as image bearers of God we are to be like our Father who is truth and in whom is no contradiction.

This morning I want to complete "Peter's Apologetics Paradigm" by adding two more points to the outline: the occasion and the manner.

1A. The Occasion of apologetics (it is questions oriented)

Interestingly, defense making is occasioned by inquiry: "always be prepared to give an answer (defense) to everyone who asks" (3:15). The occasion is inquiry regarding "your hope." Hence, the definition of apologetics as giving reasons for the hope we have as Christians. But this passage states it as something occasional: giving reasons when asked (and asking may be done without a literal question).

There is something self-evident here that should be explored. There is a sense in which we are passive responding to questions. There is a process going on in which we wait for others to come to us with questions. Their coming with questions is usually the best time for meaningful mutual exchange (though we never throw caution to the wind). So there is this passive element. But it is not passivity gone to seed. This is an important point to make in this context. We should not take this as telling us to sit back and fold our hands (don't even go there). Why does it not do this? I want to spend some time answering this question.

1) First, it does not do this because we are to be active in prayer for open doors (Col. 4:3), for God given open doors through which we are always prepared (relentlessly determined) to walk. Granted, we are not in the business of simply pushing down doors to thus make our way into the hearts and lives of our neighbors. There is a passive element in which we wait on the neighbor. We wait for expressions of interest. But we wait on the Lord and we wait in prayer expecting opportunities to come our way. We expect to be instruments in the Lord's hand for the spread of His word. This is active waiting.

2) Second, this is not a call to sit back and fold our hands because the "passive" aspect here puts an accent on something very active: we are to have answers even if there is no inquiry or questioning. I am struck by the fact that there is time in between engagement in the bantering back and forth to confirm the truth of the gospel. In this time, we are to be questioning and anticipating questions. We are to be finding answers and growing in our grasp of things.

As we have commented before, pause and retreat are suggested and they show that on the whole much more is at stake here than actually giving answers. It all begins with having answers. Therefore, the first principle before the Lord is to honor Him and walk with Him in a true discipleship. Growing in our grasp of things, issue by issue, is pleasing to the Lord. And it satisfies the curiosity of our hearts in an enriching way that gives us a sure footing. Therefore, learning apologetics is not just for the sake of the unbeliever (1 Pet. 3:16b, those who are malicious). It is for the believer. It is for the believer for the unbeliever! Like Paul saying the gospel is first to the Jews then to the Gentiles, apologetics is first for believers and then for unbelievers. Furthermore, this is not individualistic but for the edification of the body. As we hone answers in mutual interaction, we all grow together into the image of Christ.

Listen to the goal of Paul's prayer for the Ephesians (1:17-18). We have this very personal dimension that by the Spirit "we may know Him better" (that we may know our Father, the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father better). This applies behind the scenes, away from the battlefield, and in the quiet of our thoughts.

Now notice further that Paul ties his prayer to the theme of Christian hope (v. 18), which sets the stage for apologetics. It is what goes on in the times between answer giving that is vital and marvelous. As we work on finding answers under the Lordship of Christ and in commitment to learn from Him with great determination, our personal knowledge of God grows better and better. And our hope grows as well, which leads to a third reason that we are not called here to simply sit back and fold our hands.

3) Third, this is not a call to sit back and fold our hands because what we are to defend centers on our hope. It should impact us to note that people will inquire about the Christian hope even though hope is an attitude. It is subjective, something unseen but deeply felt within our hearts. We need to know what it is to see how this works.

What is hope? It is not wishing but expecting and anticipating. It does not disappoint, we do not lose hope, because of the work of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:5). From what we have now we are certain regarding the not yet (Rom. 5:9-11). There is logic in this experience. Knowing our justification by the pouring out of the Spirit in our hearts, in a fortiori fashion (the "much more" argument) we know we shall be saved from wrath in the final judgment (v. 9). We have been reconciled as enemies by the death of Christ, how much more certain is it that as His friends (those now reconciled) we shall be saved in the final judgment by the life of Christ (v. 10). A profound lesser to the greater is emphasized: being friends surpasses being enemies, death is surpassed by life.

Therefore, this is not a quiet, passive, or stagnant hope. It leads to joy and rejoicing in God (Rom. 5:11) and in anticipation of the glory of God (Rom. 5:2). Of course, this is a sober joy and not something giddy as evident in how it is developed (through suffering, perseverance, and character to hope). Note the parallel with the context of suffering in Peter's reference to hope.

I know I have mentioned this example before but it always comes to mind when I think of hope in this way. My first teacher in theology taught the meaning of hope by the chicken soup illustration. He would tell us of his student days and how his landlord would make him dinner but he would get so engrossed in study that he would delay leaving his room and going to the dinner table. His landlord had a way of getting him to the table without nagging him. She would knock on the door and give him a sample of the chicken soup. The smell and taste stirred up expectation and anticipation in him. This expectation and anticipation drove him to the supper table. Likewise, tasting of the Lord in the deeply personal learning process cultivates expectation and anticipation for the future. We expect and earnestly anticipate the awesome privilege and blessing of coming to know Him better and of coming to better understand the hope to which he has called us. That hope pertains to His glorious inheritance in the saints and His incomparably great power exercised on our behalf (Eph. 1:18).

This hope in the heart that cannot be seen spills over in all that we do. The future is not viewed as a threat. We are thus characterized by a deep inner strength and joy (joyful in hope, Rom. 12:12) that moves our feet. We seek the nourishing table of our Lord in finding answers on the way to glory as we seek, expect, and anticipate the marriage supper of the Lamb in glory. We look for a city that has foundations whose builder and maker is God (Heb. 11:10; observe the phrase "looking forward"). Because of the inheritance He promises and because of His incomparably great power, we press on day by day with confident and joyful hope (i.e., firm expectation and lively anticipation).

By God's grace, we grow in hope like a sponge soaking up so much water until it can hold no more and it drips out all over the place. This dripping out all over the place is what the unbeliever addresses when he inquires about the hope we have. Perhaps it is helpful to remind ourselves that apologetics is a way of life. It is a way of living the Christian life. It is a matter of being a Christian to review arguments as a way of expanding our hope.

Thus to wait for questions is not the same as folding the hands in idleness. We are active while we wait. We are active in prayer for God's open door. We are active finding answers that cause us to know our Lord better in a personal and enriching way. We are active finding answers that grow our hope by leaps and bounds.

Therefore, apologetics is occasioned by questions that pertain to the deep hope that conditions our conduct. It is thus a duty of Christians regarding their hope, to defend it, and to do so as that hope is embodied in conduct. The inquiry concerns your hope, your look to the future, in the face of suffering. The occasion refers to opportunities shaped by inquiry. As Elysia is doing, for example, responding to some questions asked by her friends on evolution and pre-marital sex. Apologetics is "questions occasioned."

2A. The Manner of apologetics (a godly manner)

We must remember that when an unbeliever is cornered he always has a way out, he can simply lie. That manner is not open to the Christian; apologetics is to be done in a godly manner that flows out of a godly life. To fill out the picture somewhat, we can ask and answer three questions.

1) How should we do our job or duty? (cf. the how to answer per Col. 4:6)

Peter cites three things: gentleness, respect, and a clear conscience. These are all summarized in the notion of "good behavior" (v. 16b, although good behavior specifically relates to the ongoing matter of "keeping" a clear conscience, v. 16a).

I think it is safe to assume that respect in this context refers to the showing of respect to man (which is ultimately to God). As we are to be gentle toward others so we are to be respectful. These qualities are needed when you become truly informed by pursuing answers with due diligence. Then with some serious and seasoned knowledge it is likely that you will be questioned by people who are as adamant as they are uninformed and you will be able to see that fact clearly. But what is transparent to you is opaque to them! Thus you will be tempted to pounce on them, to be harsh, and to get the intellectual club or the emotional whip and hit them where it hurts. In classroom debate, students will often respond to challenge by saying, "I just don't agree with you on that" as if this somehow confirms a weak point. At that point, I would like to have a two by four to hit them on the head but I know the gentle way is the right way.

No matter how deep our convictions may be, no matter how cherished, when they are opposed even by ignorance we are to respond in a godly way with gentleness, respect and overall good behavior.

2) Why is this a significant challenge?

I am sure that you already know the answer to this question but it bears repeating. A godly manner is a challenge because it is both a duty in the face of suffering and a duty that may lead to more suffering. As we have called it before, it is a defense/blessing that we are to give instead of retaliation and threats (1 Pet. 2:23; 3:9). The flavor of the questioning is perhaps surprisingly, insult, deceit, and malice (1 Pet. 3:9, 10, 16). As Van Til puts it, unbelievers always have an "axe to grind."

Scripture informs us that all men are sinners and seek in all that they do to suppress the basic truth of their responsibility to their Creator. They always have an "axe to grind." To say this is not to charge men with a lack of surface honesties and sincerities of civilized life. It is only to be concerned with the deepest controlling motives of men and to interpret these motives in accordance with Scripture (The God of Hope 243).

We must never forget this fundamental fact about the unbeliever. Thus we are to be alert and guarded always wearing the armor of light (Rom. 13:12). This is challenging given the context of malice and deceit. We must remember that the natural man is not genuinely seeking the truth. We can accept and go with the reality of a surface sincerity but Scripture tells us the truth of what is in the depths of the heart.

Hence the weighty challenge that a gentle, respectful, and upright manner should govern all our efforts to answer.

3) What principles ground fulfillment of this duty?

I think there are two, one in this context and one in the larger picture of man as presented in Scripture. I will start with the latter.

First, consider what we learn about our neighbor when we hear about his true motives and about his deceit and malice. We learn that those who are lost in sin are in deep need. Down under the outer façade is a profound tension of those bound in sin's grip.

To contemplate the real need that is before our eyes in their assaults and insults perhaps is at first not easy to do. But when we do it and when we see how great their need is then to that degree we will be moved to gentleness (cf. we show mercy if shown mercy).

We respect them as God's image though fallen. Even in his fallen state, man is still considered to be the image of God (cf. Gen. 9:6, capital punishment is predicated for murder because even in the fallen world man is the image of God). Man is created in the image of God, fallen from the image of God, and in desperate need of restoration in the image of God. Thus gentleness and respect go hand in hand regarding fallen image bearers in great need.

Second, the context indicates strong belief in the good though often perplexing providence of God. The relationship of providence to apologetics is that it gives comfort and encouragement. It is securing and reassuring. Providence helps us understand factuality, that there are no uncontrolled facts. It is part of the fabric of the Peter text whereby suffering is placed within the will of God for specific purposes to which we are to submit (1 Pet. 2:20b-21).

The posture we take in doing apologetics is that of belief in and submission to the providence of God. Note that inquiry concerns your hope for the future that is rooted in providence. Providence calls forth trust (entrust yourself to Him who calls), it requires submission, and it grounds hope. It is what under-girds hope in the face of suffering. And this gives strength in the midst of deceitful inquiry and direct insult to respond with Christian grace.

To paraphrase in this context: Christ is the example apologist who by suffering for you has left you an example to follow in your apologetics.