Working in apologetics is not something that should be done carelessly. While no one can claim to be the perfect apologist, it is important that as we approach these discussions, we come to the table with a strategy for engagement. I do not know if any of you are chess players like I am, but as I was thinking about the way that we help those around us understand the rationality of the Christian worldview, there are many lessons that we can learn from one of the most heavily analyzed board games in world history.
I think that there is first a comparison in regards to the structure of the game itself. As you know, every chess piece has a different function, but all of them can be used to make a checkmate. One of my favorite checkmates was one where I pinned my opponent with two pawns and the king. I think that this points towards the fact that everyone can and should be involved in apologetics. We might not have all of the ability of William Lane Craig or Ravi Zacharias, but we can still be used by God for His glory. God can use whatever pieces He wants to; He is very good at using even the most unlikely people to do great things. All of us should have a reason for the hope that we have.
Next, when you approach a chess match, you know what you want to do. I know that when I play, I have a preferred strategy, and I always open the game the same way. In apologetics, you will also probably have your area of strength. We might be drawn to different topics. You could be interested in the resurrection of Jesus Christ or the historicity of the Bible. It is important to have these areas that we have extensive knowledge in and are comfortable with on a more substantial level.
An important consequence of having a specialty is that we are all different. We can strengthen the field as a whole by being strong in different areas. Since it is hard for any individual to become an expert in everything, we can work together based upon our own interests and specialties. However, you can only do that if you have specialties to begin with.
At the same time, I also think that most chess players can identify a time when a match did not go as planned. Even though you might go in with your best foot forward, you need to adapt on the fly. This is why we do not want to become entirely one-dimensional. If I only know the minimal facts argument in regards to the resurrection of Jesus Christ, I am going to be in trouble if someone challenges me with a question about the conquering of Canaan and the morality of it. I don’t need to be an expert in every area, but it is definitely valuable to at least be informed in a variety of popular areas so that you can adapt when things don’t go with you planned them. Sometimes, being informed simply means knowing another resource to point towards if you don’t know the answer.
There is kind of a tension between my last two points. How much of a specialist or generalist do you want to be? The answer is different for everyone, but everyone I have ever met in this field at least has a little bit of each of these characteristics. For example, my favorite area of study is probably the historicity of the resurrection if you can’t tell from the number of times I referenced it in this article. I would not claim to be an expert yet, but it is where I focus most of my attention. That being said, I don’t just read about that event. I try to read about a variety of topics just to be familiar enough that I can approximately handle those deviations that are bound to come up occasionally in these types of conversations.
These are some of the reasons that both chess and apologetics have appealed to me over the years. We all have different talents and abilities, and we all have different interests and specialties. While it might seem overwhelming, if we take apologetics as a community endeavor as well as an individual one, we will find a healthy balance.
Zak, I know that your intention is to pursue the objective of defending the belief that you want to defend, that is, the Trinitarian Doctrine. However, I may say that it can’t defeat the Unitarian Belief that others profess including me. Anyway, your belief is yours but I stand frimly on the UNITARIAN Doctrine, the belief of ONE ABSOLUTE UNSEEN GOD that Jesus Christ has taught including his Apostles and Disciples. This is actually what GOD ALMIGHTY wants us to propagate and let those who has gone astray return to HIM Who is UNSEEN and ALMIGHTY! May ONLY ONE ALMIGHTY GOD enlighten you and your group! Peace and HIS Light and HIS Truth shine on all of you!
Thanks for reaching out. Yes, I do affirm the Trinity. That wasn’t really the point of my article, but I guess we can go there if you really want to.
Let me ask you a question as we open up though because I assume that you know more about Unitarian theology than I do. What do you consider Jesus Christ?
Most high-level chess games end in a draw, which is also similar to apologetics debates. If you want to win in chess instead of just having an easy draw, you must be somewhat aggressive and take chances. Is that the same in apologetics?
I don’t think that we necessarily need to be aggressive in terms of argumentative or combative just as much as I don’t think that atheists need to be. However, I do think that we need to be aggressive in the sense that we are not afraid to speak out. Again, this applies to both sides. It won’t be much of a discussion if nobody is going to actually step out and talk about controversial ideas. Nobody gains from that situation.
He’s got a point Zak! In order to push to win, one would need to be aggressive in a chess game. You have to be few steps ahead and had already thought of your moves even before you really has touched the piece. So, in order to be sure whether one would join you, one should be thinking ahead! Now, what should one take to stand on?? What belief should he cling to in order to be saved?? A Uni-GOD or ONE ABSOLUTE GOD or a TRIUN God like you people stand on??? I stand on my ONE GOD UNSEEN! How about you?? Where do you stand??
Nothing wrong with ending in a draw. Why is it so important in a discussion to win all the time? There is another day you know. Perhaps I have educated the other, perhaps he/she has educated me. But of course it is not a game. It is the soul that is at stake and being able to have a dialog without regard to winning or losing is the most important first step
Fair enough. Like you said, the point should be discussion. Maybe ideas will change, and maybe they won’t, but we at least need to engage in the discussion. Good point.
On some level you tacitly know that it’s time for you to shut your neck bearded head. Search your feelings, butthurt boy, you know this to be true. Yours is a worldview so petty, so trivial, so localized, so earth bound, so unworthy of the universe.
Good thoughts here. Games are a good metaphor for many things in life. God gives us good metaphors! We need to remember their power when we witness to His greatness. Thanks for sharing this. I need to be more mentally proactive about my witness and this helps.
You make another good point I should have mentioned. There is something to be said for being proactive and anticipating future “moves” that might come up in a discussion. Thanks for your comment!