For better or worse, I’ve spent countless hours over the years debating atheists in online forums. I was there when the Reasonable Faith Facebook Page had around 11,000 likes (it’s currently at 670,000). RF had less trolls back then, but still required a lot of work. Over the years I’ve learned what to do and what not to do. I sort of wish I didn’t have all this experience in online debating to be giving you all this information, nevertheless, my hope is that if you find yourself in such a situation, this list of don’ts for Christian Apologists will be helpful.
A Dozen Don’ts
1. Don’t take internet atheists very seriously.
Atheists that make a career out of debating Christians online are generally not going to be experts in the field of religion. As such, we shouldn’t take them, or their opinions, very seriously. The arguments they regurgitate, if they have any merit at all, are only loosely based on the work of professionals. Philosophers of religion are much more careful in what they say and how they say it. An amateur is more likely to make little errors an expert will not. For this simple reason, the claims of internet atheists shouldn’t be taken very seriously.
Here’s what I’m not saying. I’m not saying we should unreflectively dismiss anything a non-expert believes. Rather, I’m saying we should be careful not to overvalue the opinions of lay-people. This principle doesn’t just apply to religion – it applies across the philosophical spectrum. The claims and ideas we should be taking seriously (on a regular basis) are those put forth by competent authorities.
2. Don’t get sucked in.
Some atheists are highly skilled at baiting Christians into debate. They’ll say things like, “Christianity is obviously irrational,” or, “There’s no evidence Jesus even existed,” or, “Jesus was a zombie,” or, “All of the arguments for God are terrible and have been debunked over and over.” Our natural inclination is to refute such nonsense, but let me suggest a different kind of response. One of the deadliest tools in our arsenal is knowing when and how to ignore people. There are of course times when a response to these claims is appropriate, but we should only join a discussion we consciously choose to join, knowing full-well the ramifications of our doing so. Don’t get sucked in.
3. Don’t shoot from the hip.
This is one of my biggest pet peeves. In the online debating world, I’ve seen people make all sorts of unsubstantiated claims. Instead of admitting ignorance, they begin shooting from the hip, hoping that something, anything, sticks. If you don’t know what extra-biblical evidence exists for the martyrdom of early Christians, don’t just blurt out that said evidence exists (or doesn’t exist). Bluffing to save face is completely embarrassing. Bluffs eventually get called; you will be exposed for the charlatan you are – either in this life or the next. The saddest part is that there’s so much evidence in favor of Christianity, we aren’t forced to shoot from the hip in order to defend it.
Don’t. Do. It.
4. Don’t have the last word.
This is another peeve of mine. Truth is not reserved for the person that has the last word. If your atheist interlocutor wants to stay up till 4am responding to every comment you make, let him. Better yet, learn when the discussion is no longer fruitful and end it. Here’s an easy and respectful way to bow out of a discussion:
This doesn’t convey ignorance or ineptitude. Quite the opposite. It shows that you value substantive discussion and aren’t interested in wasting either you or your interlocutor’s time.
5. Don’t let your insecurities own you.
Here’s a theory of mine: Online debating is largely the result of unchecked insecurities. Christians, atheists, agnostics, whatever, we are insecure about our beliefs and intelligence and thus engage our peers in debate so we can be validated and feel better about ourselves. I am insecure about my intellect so I’ll go online and incessantly debate people I deem less smart than me. I’m insecure about my beliefs, so I’ll go and debate this person that hasn’t read all the papers I’ve read and show them how uninformed they are. The act of debating is an outward expression of deeply rooted insecurities.
These unchecked insecurities can–if we let them–rule over our thoughts and actions. Defending Christianity shouldn’t feel like a “Who’s Smarter” or “Who can quote more philosophers” competition. Before logging on, make it a habit to ask yourself this question: “Why am I going online to debate today?” If ever you can’t think of a good answer to this question, perhaps it’s time to take a step back and reassess your motivations.
6. Don’t waste your time.
You should be reading at least twice as much as debating. For every hour you spend debating online, you should spend at least two hours reading books, papers, journals, listening to lectures, and growing in knowledge. Call this Bertuzzi’s Maxim. If you think that’s too much studying, you’re simply not taking Christian Apologetics seriously. Don’t spend the majority of your time engaging non-experts, spend it with seasoned professionals. Learn how scholars express and defend their arguments. Learn how to accurately articulate and soundly refute objections to your view.
“For every hour you spend debating online, you should spend at least two hours reading books, papers, journals, listening to lectures, and growing in knowledge.”
If I could go back and do things over, marrying this rubric is exactly where I’d start. The number of hours I’ve wasted debating random people online could have been replaced with reading good philosophy. Here’s a question to ask yourself before each comment you post: “Do I have one good reason to spend another second doing this rather than reading?” Virtually every time I ask myself this, the answer is no.
7. Don’t be disorganized.
This one is extremely important. Don’t go into a Facebook or online debate forum without some kind of game plan. Why are you going in in the first place? Is it to change the cultural perception of Christians? Is it to get a better understanding of how atheists think? Keep these goals plastered on your mind before, during, and after going in. They will guide your interactions and lead to more productive discussions.
Once you’ve got a goal in place, it’s a good idea to limit your interactions to posts and topics you are well-versed in. Don’t go challenging atheists on a subject you don’t know anything about. Also, very important, keep track of your time. Some of these discussions can go on for hours, even days, some even weeks. Be cognizant of how much of your time is being devoted to each conversation. Last organizational tip: Try your best to engage in one conversation at a time. Multiple dialogue strings can get confusing and even overwhelming. Don’t.
8. Don’t do it alone.
This is also super important. If you are new to Apologetics, stop whatever you’re doing and forge relationships with seasoned Christian apologists. Create solid friendships with smarter and more informed Christians than you. This has been instrumental in my growth as an apologist (both intellectually and spiritually). It’s unfortunate but some of the most substantive and thought-provoking critiques of my arguments have come from other Christians. The same is true in the academic arena (see this and this).
There are Facebook groups dedicated to Christian fellowship for apologists. Seek them out and begin forging relationships. The Bible also encourages this kind of fellowship (see Hebrews 10:24-25 and 1 Thessalonians 5:11).
9. Don’t limit your audience.
The atheists I’ve met online generally haven’t been very open to Christianity. That isn’t to say there were never any, but over the years I could probably count on one hand the ones I considered open. If your main goal with apologetics is to win people to Christ, debating with people on the internet is probably the last place to start. Don’t limit your audience to people that are systematically closed off to considering alternative views.
Find ways to engage people at work, engage your friends and family members. Strike up little conversations with a waiter or cashier. Don’t limit your audience.
10. Don’t forget to pray.
I’ll be honest. Prayer is something I don’t do often enough. I’m often so immersed in the literature or my projects I forget to slow down and pray (what a sorry excuse!).
11. Don’t neglect the Bible.
Some of you already know how I feel about taking the Bible seriously. Christian Apologists have done a great job so far in terms of defending God’s existence, but we’ve got a long way to go when it comes to defending the Bible. Knowing, for instance, that non-chronological narration was common in the ancient world can help squash concerns that the Gospels disagree on the order of events. The first step to combating culture is taking the Bible seriously, for yourself. You must take the bible seriously. Seek to understand its historical and canonical context, learn the literary genres, ask the questions that biblical scholars are asking.
It goes without saying, Bible reading is essential for spiritual growth. If this is an area you’ve felt stagnant in, I would highly suggest listening to a podcast like The Naked Bible or Timothy Keller Sermons by Gospel in Life. Both are amazing resources. The latter being instrumental in my spiritual growth as of late.
12. Don’t reject Christ.
There are two ways in which one can reject Christ in doing apologetics. First, one can completely fail to be Christ-like. Consider the following passage:
How would you rate your online interactions? How Christ-like are they really? Are you using your intellect to put others down or are you being humble, preferring others above yourself? If we’re being honest, most of us do a very poor job at reflecting Christ through our writings.
Second, apologists can utterly fail to ever present the Gospel. This is a travesty. In his advice to preachers and teachers, Tim Keller argues that we should be preaching Christ every time. Every sermon, every talk, every debate, every time we have the opportunity to speak about Christianity, we should be sharing the Gospel message. It’s no accident that every sermon in Acts centers on the Resurrection of Jesus. As Paul said, “If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile.” Recenter your interactions on what matters most: The Good News of Jesus Christ.
Great tips! Although I don’t imagine myself debating atheists online anytime soon. A lot of these tips I can use with Christian I meet with questionable theology! Not only that but in day to day life disagreements with others!
Awesome! Glad you could find some use out of it.
Excellent points!!
Thanks for reading!
Hello Cameron Thank you for those tips, i will try to keep those at the forefront of my mind during my on line work. Gods blessings to you Graham
Thanks for reading!
So in other words, dont engage with those who might cause you to doubt your cult. Ok.
First, Christianity is the largest religion in the world. That automatically disqualifies it as a “cult.” See here: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/05/christians-remain-worlds-largest-religious-group-but-they-are-declining-in-europe/
Second, of course that’s not what I’m saying in this post. Did you read it?
LOL, a cult is a cult, whether it is small in numbers, or grew big………. A cult is a religious devotion to a figure as a “god” or a special envoy/representative/figure head of “god”, with unique status, that results in a “we”/”they” mentality amongst constituents. Christianity ABSOLUTELY qualifies as a cult at its start, and REMAINS so, despite the cult growing larger over time. JUST LIKE with Mormonism, JW’s, Islam, etc etc…………
LOL, a cult is a cult, whether it is small in numbers, or grew big………. A cult is a religious devotion to a figure as a “god” or a special envoy/representative/figure head of “god”, with unique status, that results in a “we”/”they” mentality amongst constituents. Christianity ABSOLUTELY qualifies as a cult at its start, and REMAINS so, despite the cult growing larger over time. JUST LIKE with Mormonism, JW’s, Islam, etc etc…………
People can never cause us to doubt, regardless of what we believe. People in and of themselves can only coerce or manipulate. Only objective logical argument can rightly persuade or illuminate flaws in a belief. People are capable of carrying such an objective message, but it is the logic that persuades in such cases, not the authority of the person. Cults, and cult-like tactics presumably attempt to dominate or harrass others via manipulation, preying on people’s legitimate need for affirmation and acceptance. Your baseless accusation may or may not be an example of that kind of manipulation and harrassment. What… Read more »
What the article suggests, BOILS down to staying away from anyone whose arguments OR RHETORIC might cause doubt for the cultist………… You are DISHONEST to pretend otherwise……….. Signed, been there, done that, for many years.
Your rhetoric (accusations) cause me no doubts. I do agree however that the size of an institution does not determine if it is a cult. That would be to commit the ad populum logical fallacy. So as I said, logic informs my view. Many Christians are ignorant of the fact (and the enormous implications) that Christianity is the religion of the Logos. This is the case whether we/they realize it or not (see link). That is why it is not a cult in the sense of being coercive or manipulative, though any of its adherents can be from time to… Read more »
YOUR rhetoric causes me no convincing. And it is simply a MISNOMER that “christianity is the religion of the Logos”. It would be accurate to say that some sects of the fledgling, developing JEsus as the Christ cult, in the last first century were forming and using a “logos” idea…….. The idea of JEsus (the whole Jesus event) being the “logos” of “God”, comes from the Johannine sect of believers, and was THEIR CULTIC INTERPRETATION of the Jesus story as they had it………… in other words, it was a sects’ BELIEFS………. and that no more gives us any solid ontological… Read more »
And down the rabbit hole we go… Everything we say or think can be measured by only one ultimate epistomological foundation. That must be established before we wax ontologically. And that foundation is logic. Its why the very terms contain the word logic. The empirical sciences for instance, presuppose the validity of logic in order to proceed, but cannot prove logic valid empirically. Logic is the thing that MUST be true or else nothing can be, including your criticisms. We are not omniscient, and apart from omniscience we are forced to believe in something. There is only one thing worthy… Read more »
Pulling make believe rabbits out of make believe hats there now are ‘ya ? Nice straw men you put up there buddy, but I NEVER said that logic isn’t “true”, and I NEVER said that logic is the same as belief in ad hoc doctrines or dogmas and I NEVER said that reality is not ultimately logical and I NEVER said that humanism is true. My point was that the whole Jesus as “logos” concept, is something that a few Jesus as the Christ cultists INVENTED in their christology ( an interpretation of Jesus as the “christ”). They took the… Read more »
Aristotle did not invent logic or the law of non contradiction any more than others invented the laws of physics. These are DISCOVERED, not invented. Aristotle only DEFINED the law of non contradiction in his contemporary terms using the Greek language. But you are quite right that the concept (the reality) is much older. We see the law of non contradiction in the first commandment for instance- I am the Lord your God. You shall have no other gods before me. John saw logos as the light in Genesis 1. And though the Hebrews may not have called their philosophy… Read more »
I NEVER said that Aristotle invented logic……………. holy cow, you just like to pull make believe rabbits out of make believe hats don’t you ? That the “law of noncontradiction” is true, and that physicists have “discovered” ( more like, UNcovered) “laws” ( the human word) to describe “regularities”……… in nature and the cosmos……… has NOTHING to do with “logos” as the early christian sect used it and intended it. And as for your statement that “the only kind of religion that CAN be true, or known is the kind of religion portrayed in the bible”……………. Holy cow give me… Read more »
Well suit yourself. It doesn’t bother me if you think I am nuts. And I do not deny that many attempt to force all of reality into their views. But logically, all of reality must fit into SOME particular view. So the attempt to get a handle on that big picture is to me a worthy goal. But the idea of allowing logic to build the picture FOR us, and correct any distortions in one’s current lens cannot itself be an attempt to force reality into my subjective views. If the incarnation, resurrection, and ascension to heaven of Jesus cannot… Read more »
I’m NOT an atheist or materialist. Geez why do you people ALWAYS assume that of someone, if they don’t believe your ancient jewish ghost tales ? And umm, there is NO evidence, OR “logical” reason to say that all of reality MUST fit into some particular view……….. And I NEVER said it wasn’t a worthy goal to try and find a big picture view that makes sense. As for a “jesus” that was magically put into a virgin by an invisible hebrew war god, and then walked on water, appeased his invisible war god daddy Abba, then rode a cloud… Read more »
Yeah, Joseph felt that way too. And of course, it WOULDN’T be logical to really consider such fantastic twists in the plot if we make certain assumptions. Most of us DO assume that any supposed God or savior would rescue us from the evils of this life. A loving God would spare us from injustice, plague, famine and death. As an orthodox Jew once said to Lennox, “Jesus didn’t save anyone from anything. When he came, we were under Roman occupation. When he left, we were still under Roman occupation, and in 70AD Titus came and destroyed our temple. Jesus… Read more »
What in the world are you talking about? I NEVER said ANYTHING about “God” or a “savior” not rescuing us from evils, injustice, plagues, etc etc……… I NEVER made an issue of that in ANY of my posts to you here. This is like the 3rd post now, where you are just pulling crap out of your bottom, things I NEVER actually said. Your DISHONESTY in discussion is staggering, though I guess, I shouldn’t be surprised, it is the one constant with you people. And NOTHING you said, demonstrates the reality of the gist of the christian claims, that an… Read more »
smart!!