Gospel-centered apologetics endeavors to keep the heart and mind of the non-believer focused upon his need to receive the Good News because it alone is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes (Rom 1:16).
Gospel-centered apologetics recognizes the importance of a personal evangelism model when working with individuals. Far too often evangelists subconsciously work from a mass evangelism model wherein the Christian “preaches” to the non-believer. But the New Testament reveals that Jesus and the apostles most often evangelized individuals in a manner different from that directed to a gathering of people. Personal evangelism is dialogical; the conversation is two-way. Dialogue allows a spiritual diagnosis of the non-believer, a critically important element if the evangelist is to know how best to address a specific citadel of unbelief. Dialogue also removes unnecessary pressure from an evangelist. He is no longer required to do all the talking or be the expert on any matter the unbeliever might raise. Indeed, a Gospel-centered dialogue requires the non-believer to face up to just what he believes about life’s most important questions.
Gospel-centered apologetics recognizes that all non-Christians believe a false gospel that seems true to them. Their unbelieving and idolatrous worldview provides the lenses through which they understand the world. All mature worldviews contain the essential doctrines of creation, fall, redemption, and the last things. Differing versions of these doctrines are recognizable in all worldviews, and the evangelist/apologist can utilize dialogue regarding these doctrines not only as a means to diagnose the non-believer, but also to present the Gospel simply and understandably. The easiest way to discuss these doctrines is by asking the right questions.
The answers to the following questions encapsulate the major doctrinal components of all worldviews: (1) Where did I come from? (2) What’s wrong? (3) What’s the solution? and (4) Where am I going? These questions address the doctrines of creation, fall, salvation, and final judgment. Modeling the Bible’s emphasis, the questions set the stage for Gospel-centered apologetics. Biblical illiterates will not understand salvation in Christ without a corresponding understanding of creation, fall, and final judgment.
Four simple strategies can be powerfully employed in discussing the four questions. Though expertise in all four strategies is ideal, only the first stratagem is necessary. They are discussed in decreasing importance.
Contrast
The foremost and necessary strategy can be called contrast. No evangelism ever takes place unless the evangelist makes clear just how the non-believer’s false gospel differs from that of the Bible. The unbeliever, by being led to compare answers to the four big questions, is brought face to face with God’s Word, and in so doing experiences a contrast of gospels. Notice that this first strategy is not only the essential step in Gospel-centered apologetics but is itself the essence of evangelism.
In contrast to other gospels/worldviews, the wise apologist recognizes that biblical answers to the big questions always point the non-believer to God. “Where did we come from? Our Creator.” “What’s wrong? We cannot mend our broken relationship with the Creator.” “What’s the answer? Our Creator alone can repair the relationship—and has provided a way for this in Jesus Christ!” “Where are we going? When we die, we will meet our Creator to account for our response to Him.”
In the contrast of gospels, the non-believer must think through and become accountable for his answers to the ultimate questions. The apologist should bring to light the implications of the contrasting answers. For instance, huge differences are typical in answers to the first question (“Where did I come from?”). What one believes about the origin of the universe brings into play the essential nature of human beings. The Bible reveals that God created humans in His own image as the crown of creation. A comparison of answers to the second question (“What’s wrong?”) also highlights the biblical emphasis on the radical and irreparable brokenness of the human race.
Compatibility
The second Gospel-centered apologetics strategy can be called compatibility. Some, even if few, of the non-believer’s doctrines will be reasonably compatible with the Bible. Human beings live in God’s world and inevitably will agree to some extent with biblical teaching about the true nature of things. For instance, a non-believer might be appalled at the way most atheists reject transcendent purpose and value. The evangelist can agree, and then point out the beauty and coherence of the biblical teaching that God has created human beings for a purpose in a world with objective value. The compatibility strategy allows the non-believer to lower his defenses and realize the power and divine wisdom of biblical answers.
Consistency
The third strategy deals with consistency. Non-Christian belief systems inevitably contradict themselves. For the evangelist/apologist to apply the consistency strategy, he need not be an expert in logic or have studied in advance the particular worldview of the non-believer. But he must learn to listen carefully. The non-believer will often be impressed to find a Christian who pays attention instead of trying to dominate the conversation. But the more the non-believer shares the particulars of his worldview, the more the apologist will identify doctrines inconsistent with one another. The Christian can then kindly request an explanation of how such doctrinal inconsistencies make sense.
For example, while discussing the first question, an evolutionary naturalist will typically contend for a universe with no purpose. But when question two arises, he will often speak about the problem(s) of the human race as if objective moral values are violated. At this point the evangelist should winsomely note the inconsistency: how can there be no plan for the universe yet there be a moral plan/purpose for human beings?
Confirmation
The fourth strategy of Gospel-centered apologetics is confirmation. In an ultimate questions dialogue, non-believers often claim that certain facts rebut the Gospel. But since the Christian worldview is true, the truth about biblical studies, theology, philosophy, science, or history will confirm the Gospel. Of course, interpreted in light of his false gospel, a non-believer will often reject such truths. But this does not imply that the apologist should not employ them any more than the non-believer’s rejection of the Good News implies it should not be preached. Over time if God’s truth is received, the fallow ground of the heart may be broken up and a harvest of eternal life spring up.
The apologist should seek to present truths that are relevant not only to the specific non-believer but also to a Gospel-centered conversation. The use of reason and facts should ultimately lead the discussion back to biblical answers to the worldview questions. The evangelist should not let the non-believer lose sight of the differing implications arising from their different answers (e.g., human purpose vs. human purposelessness). In discussing the fourth question, “Where am I going?” historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus may provide a powerful means for focusing not only on the issue of life after death, but also on His being the sole historical conqueror of death–and Savior of the world. The confirmation strategy requires the most preparation; shortcuts in training are not possible. And though ability in confirmation is the least important of the strategies, a well-prepared Gospel-centered apologist is a powerful agent for Great Commission advance.
