Apologetics and Legacy of Norman Geisler

Darrell Bock: 

Welcome to The Table where we discuss issues of God and culture. I'm Darrell Bock, executive director for cultural engagement at Dallas Theological Seminary and at the Hendricks Center in Dallas. And my guest today is David Geisler, president of Norm Geisler International Ministries. And we'll explain the name change in just a second for those of you don't know history, but it be transparent once we do it. And is adjunct professor at Southern Evangelical Seminary in Charlotte, North Carolina and Veritas International University in Southern California. And he's been teaching what he calls practical apologetics for a long time. I can't imagine, in some ways, having a better guest who, on the one hand, deals with the substance of what apologetics is, on the other hand, and wrestles with the question of, all right, how do we do this on the other? David, thanks for being with us on the table. 

David Geisler: 

Hey Darrell, great to be with you today. 

Darrell Bock: 

My standard question, it's like the equivalent of a baptism for this podcast is how did a nice guy like you get into a gig like this? And I guess we've got to explain you're David Geisler, but you're president of Norm Geisler International Ministry, so let's put that together for people who may be young and may not know who your dad is. 

David Geisler: 

Yeah. My father is considered the grandfather of classical apologetics. Classical apologetics is what's called two-step apologetics where you established the worldview of theism and then you look at the evidence. It would be different than, say, an evidentialist who would say basically you just look at the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and that proves that Christianity is true. Or a classical apologist would say, "Well, once you've established that atheist to God exists, then looking at the evidence does prove that Jesus is the Messiah." 

Darrell Bock: 

Your dad, let's talk about him for a little bit, was trained, I think, in philosophy as well as in Christian theology. Is that a fair representation of him? 

David Geisler: 

Absolutely. In fact, I don't know if our audience knows his story, but my father was practically illiterate till he was 17 years old, became a Christian, and then took 20 years to educate himself and got a PhD in philosophy. And as you know, we made this movie about his life, normgeislerthemovie.com, just as a resource for the church. 

Darrell Bock: 

Yeah. And I've seen it, and it's a fascinating walk through your dad's life. And there are things in there that I didn't know about him, even though we were colleagues overlapping for several years when he was here at Dallas. The other thing that's unusual about the philosophical depth of what your dad brought to his apologetics was he was very well schooled, I think would be the way to say it, or very well-informed on the Catholic philosophical tradition. Isn't that right? 

David Geisler: 

Yes. And one of the things that Richard Howell brings out in the movie is that my father took the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas and applied it to Protestant thought. And he impacted a whole generation of Christian leaders and, yeah, helped us to see that we don't just have to start with the Bible as the word of God, that we can use general revelation and talk about truth and help people to see there's good evidence that God exists. Because if God exists and miracles are possible, then you can look at the New Testament and see what Jesus claimed and Jesus proved and therefore conclude that Jesus is God. 

Darrell Bock: 

One of the places where evidentialists and classic apologist overlap is in the area where they say we can use and think about the way God works in the world itself and in general revelation as a whole, we can think about the way we should think about science in a way that integrates science and faith that's in a way that's healthy as opposed to being combative, those kinds of ideas. Let me just contrast that to say the presuppositionalist who simply says, 'You presuppose that everything the Bible says is true and you don't go down the evidentiary path and you don't go down the classical apologist path because then you're trying to prove the Bible and the Bible is the word of God so you shouldn't really try and do anything to buttress it up." That's the more presuppositional approach. But the more important point that I'm trying to make right now is the way in which you integrate what's going on within the Bible and set that in a frame that makes sense out of the whole of reality that God has created. 

David Geisler: 

And this is exactly what the Apostle Paul did in Romans chapter one, he basically helped them to see that we can know just from what God created that there is a intelligent creator who is all powerful. And we can know a lot about his attributes, and we can use those as bridges. 

When my father first started out his spiritual journey in the '50s and '60s, he learned three things. He learned that all truth is God's truth, that faith and reason are more compatible than even most Christians realize, and that there is an appropriate way to use apologetics in our witness to others. And he taught me and a number of people those simple principles. 

And they're really life changing. It's really helped my ministry over the years. I was a missionary in Asia for several years and I was a missionary here. And it's really helped to have these resources that so when people bring objections or they have trouble just accepting the Bible is the word of God, we have recourse. We don't have to stop there, we can help build that common ground with people and help them deceive that the Bible can be trusted. 

Darrell Bock: 

Yeah. I did not grow up in a Christian home. I came to the Lord to my freshman and sophomore year in college at the University of Texas in Austin, believe it or not, through the witness of several believers. But one of the first apologetic works I came across when I was thinking in the area of biblical studies was a general introduction to the Bible that your dad did with Bill Nicks. And Bill, who lived in the Dallas area for a long time, he and I used to go to lunch regularly when I was on faculty here and just interact with the contents of that book, et cetera. In some ways, it laid a foundation for me in terms of thinking through the truthfulness of the Bible, the nature of the manuscript tradition, the different kinds of issues that would come up in the Bible, et cetera, really core foundational stuff that was important in getting a good, solid base and orientation to what it is that the Bible is and in some cases what it is that the Bible isn't and creating the right kinds of expectations for what the text was attempting to do. 

Yeah. And this classical fusion between the role of philosophy and helping us think through worldview kinds of questions and then the biblical studies technical stuff, which is where I've ended up, is an important combination. And I find that sometimes when we talk apologetics, at least in the popular realm, that people may have done a pretty good dip into the philosophical classical side of apologetics, which is does God exist? What about the problem of evil, the nature of suffering? Those kinds of questions. But they tend not to be as deeply connected to the biblical studies as why can't I trust the Old Testament? What about the New Testament? That kind of thing. The particular problems that those raise. The resurrection in particular, Jesus, historical Jesus questions, that kind of thing. And even programs that are designed nationally at schools are weighted more oftentimes on the philosophical side than they are on the biblical study side. And so that introduction was making a statement that I think was important in terms of connecting the philosophical worldview discussions with the nature of the Bible discussions, which are also an important part of apologetics. 

David Geisler: 

Yeah. And I think my father was, in some ways, a bridge to help people understand those two things. And that led of course to the ICBI statement. 

Darrell Bock: 

That's where I was going next. Why don't you explain what that is? Good. ICBI, tell people about the ICBI because our younger listeners may not even know what that is. 

David Geisler: 

The International Council of Biblical Inerrancy. There were about 300 scholars from all different denominations of evangelical community got together in Chicago. What year was that? 19- 

Darrell Bock: 

I think the statement came out in '79. Am I right about that? 

David Geisler: 

Oh, '79. And then it also came out with another statement. 

Darrell Bock: 

There was a hermeneutical statement that came a few years later. 

David Geisler: 

Yeah, that the Bible is the word of God. I think one of the greatest lines in the whole movie by Josh McDowell is he would say something like this: "If you let inerrancy slip, then every other doctrine in scripture will slip intellectually." And I just think it was just such a powerful moment, and it really clearly communicated why inerrancy is so important, that if we can't trust that the Bible is the word of God and essential matters, how can we... or in trivial matters, how can we trust it in essential matters? 

Darrell Bock: 

And of course the important part of the Chicago statement, which was written out in articles, and then there were affirmations and denials that came with it, was trying to deal with what I call the nitty grittier granular nature of what it means to believe inerrancy. This is what an inerrancy does mean. And again, this is what inerrancy does mean, this is what inerrancy doesn't mean. This is what inerrancy requires, this is what inerrancy doesn't require, which is really helpful in some of the areas certainly that I get to work in, which is what do you do with these gospel accounts when you put them side by side and there are these little differences in the way events get described and worded? Are those contradictions or are they complimentary accounts of the same event? That kind of a problem. 

And some of these articles in the Chicago statement are an attempt to be clear about what the playing field is that you're on because sometimes you can make the Bible do too much versus too little and get yourself into trouble by expecting things out of the Bible it isn't intending to do. And so those conversations, which had a mixture of philosophical and systematic theologians and biblical scholars as well. I think some of the other names that are associated with... I know Harold Hunter was very involved from our department. I think Walt Kaiser was involved as an Old Testament person in that group. You had J.I. Packer who was representing systematic theology in that area, James Boyce who was a pastor who was trying to apply what was going on. This really was quite a mix of people who were saying, "When I say the Bible is the word of God and I believe what it is that it's saying, this is what I mean by this." 

David Geisler: 

And this was at a time out of, if you remember from the movie, that our culture was beginning to accept the idea that we can't even know reality. And there weren't enough Christians that were trained in philosophy to be able to respond to all the people that were making those kinds of statements. And I think personally, Darrell, that's why the Christian culture got run over by the secular culture during that time because there weren't enough of us like my father that were speaking philosophically to the wrong philosophy of our culture. And it had implications in the Christian Church as well. 

Darrell Bock: 

And the other dimension of this conversation that was happening internally within some segments of evangelicalism was you can believe the Bible but it's infallible with the regard matters of faith and practice, but the other stuff doesn't matter. And the attempt to make that kind of a distinction produced internal inconsistencies for the faith that also had to be dealt with. It was a conversation that was taking place on multiple fronts in many ways. 

David Geisler: 

Right, right. And then remember in our culture during the '60s through the '90s, this was a time when the Supreme Court had decided that you can't talk about a God creator, creation or God-given moral values in a public school. And my father tried to play a part in that as well and get that turned around. And we lost that battle. Just think of what happened to our culture since then, since the '90s; we've gone even further. And- 

Darrell Bock: 

The hard part of that conversation is the fact that we have a citizenry. Well, let me back up and say it this way because I've written about this. Robert Novak, who's a very good cultural observer, said that our country was really built on two wings simultaneously. Think about an airplane. The Judeo-Christian values and net that wrapped around Western culture on the one hand and principles of the enlightenment on the other. And the Enlightenment principles had come out of a reaction to European conflict, religious conflict that had taken place over many centuries that created the space for religious liberty, for example. Why you were trying to move away from a state recognized religion and that kind of thing, which often was the case. 

But in going in that direction, it also opened up the idea of a person's religious beliefs, whether they were religious or not were a matter of their own conscience and their own personal decision, created that space. And so Novak says, "It's two wings, but in the end, the design, rightly or wrongly, leans in the enlightenment direction than it does in the Judeo-Christian net direction." And so we're getting then, if I can say it, the natural outcome of that imbalance in what we're seeing in our culture. 

David Geisler: 

And there are more skeptics and atheists today than ever before. 

Darrell Bock: 

Exactly. 

David Geisler: 

And that's why apologetics is so important. That's what I'm trying to do with this movie. I'm trying to use this movie as a catalyst to awaken the church. Because I told you about the three things that my father discovered when he first started his journey in the '50s and '60s, that all truth is God's truth, faith and reason are compatible and there's an appropriate way to use apologetics. I've discovered just that people don't realize these things like when I'm showing the movie in different places around the country that even some pastors don't even understand that, as my father taught, there's a difference between belief that and belief in. That apologetics bears on the question of belief that, not on the question of belief in. That's a matter of the Holy Spirit. And that's actually what my father said the evidentialists and presuppositionalists are confused about. They're not making that clear distinction that evidence deals with belief that, but it's the Holy Spirit that works on people's hearts. 

Darrell Bock: 

We're in a segment here where I can go one of two ways. What I'm going to do is I'm going to say the two ways so that we're sure to cover them both, and yet at the same time I want to go through those three core points because I think they're important. And then I want to come back and talk about... Our engagement in apologetics isn't just about our intellect in the end; there's more going on there. Those are the two places I want to go. 

Let's start with the three points. The first is that all truth is God's truth. This alludes to something that we've already talked about a little bit, and that is that every sphere has something to offer. If we think about it through a godly worldview, I don't know, a Christian worldview, then there are ways the philosophers and questions that philosophers ask that are worth probing from that point of view; science the same way. 

David Geisler: 

Psychology. Every field has some truth that we can learn something from and put it within the Christian worldview context. 

Darrell Bock: 

Just to put this in a theological frame, we could say it this way: Oftentimes this point is made, well, we're fallen creatures so we can't read what's going on the outside very well. But the flip side of that is that we're also made in the image of God and we're hardwired to think in certain ways as human being. Most human beings, even if they aren't Christians, think that there is a spiritual world out there, that there's something more than us, those kinds of ideas. And that's coming from somewhere. And when we apply a godly worldview or a biblical worldview to those kinds of questions, we can probe those areas positively. I'm assuming that that's what's underneath that first point, that all truth is God's truth. However God has made the world and the reality in which it functions, when we discover that, we're running into something that God has done and created. 

David Geisler: 

Yes. And also with that first Corinthians 9:22, Paul said, "I became all things to all men, so by all means I may save some." We can find common ground with every non-believer, we just have to be sensitive to looking for those bridges that we have with people. 

Darrell Bock: 

Yep. That's good. I'm tempting to go in a place, but I'm going to avoid the temptation because it'll knock us off course. Let's talk about the second one. What's the second principle that you said your dad had? 

David Geisler: 

That faith and reason are more compatible than most Christians realize. And here's what my father taught me: that I can trust God for the things I don't know because of what he's revealed to me that I do know. And- 

Darrell Bock: 

This is actually his pushback against any anti-intellectualism in the church. Is that right? 

David Geisler: 

Yes. And showing how faith and reason can be more compatible, that we can still trust God for the things we don't know because of what He's revealed to us that we do know. For example, we can know from reason alone, Romans one says that God exists, but we can't know from reason alone that God is a triune God, that He's a trinity. And that's where we take a step of faith. And so we need both general revelation and special revelation. If you and I are going to be Christians who can really communicate well in our culture. 

Darrell Bock: 

Okay. Everything about the way your dad pursued learning about philosophy and depth is a reflection, I think, of that commitment. He wanted to understand the way in which... Both positively and negatively, by the way. Not just what we got right, but some of the things we've dealt with that steer us off course, and understanding where that comes from and what the impact and effect of that is. It's one of the advantages of doing some good, solid, historical philosophical work is the ability to spot those moves when they're made. And this is a passage several people quote, but I remember your dad in particular quoting, "We take every thought captive for Christ." And that was another principle that I think he would have shared regularly with students. Okay, so let's go to the third one. What's the third one? 

David Geisler: 

The third one is there's an appropriate way to use apologetics in a witness to others. And this is my specialty, actually. I wrote a book with my father called Conversational Evangelism where I just applied everything he taught me about apologetics and I applied it to the area of witnessing. And that's what I've been doing for many, many years. My father would say it this way. One of the first things he taught me is you don't go to war with a pea shooter but you don't go to target practice with a bazooka. Find what's the appropriate apologetic approach. 

I have a new skeptical scholarly friend in the last few years, and after reading his book, I didn't argue with him, I actually sat and wept for him, I cried. And then I told him, I said, "Just want you to know that I don't think there's anything in your book that would keep you from trusting Christ. And I just want you to know I just sat and wept for you for about 10 minutes." See, and I think we have to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit when to push forward and use all these great apologetic tools that my father and others have developed and be sensitive to know is there a moment that we can communicate something even more important than just a specific point that we're trying to make about the Christian faith? 

Darrell Bock: 

Okay, now you've now gone into a space that I think is so important for the church, I can hardly emphasize it enough, and that is that your engagement with people who are not a part of the church isn't just an intellectual exercise, it's a relational exercise. And that sometimes we err because we have all this stuff we want to communicate to people, but we don't necessarily give care to how we communicate it in the way in which we say it. Whether we've done any preparation to help the person be receptive for the kind of thing that we're going to say. 

I often talk about when you're first getting to know someone, your first assignment is to get what I call a spiritual GPS reading on them. How do they think in the spiritual realm? What are their values? What brought them there? Just let them tell their story. And you put your doctrinal meter on mute. You don't turn it off because you can't, but you put it on mute and you just let them tell their story, which actually opens up in relationally the opportunity for them to do the same with you down the road, so that's one of the benefits. 

And the other benefit is you might find out, one, what their perception of Christianity is, two, if there are any impediments to that understanding that they get in the way or that drive the way they're thinking about Christianity, et cetera. Again, another thing I'll say regularly is if someone is never darkened the door of a church, then their definition of Christianity is coming from one of two places, or a combination: that is the Christians that they know and/or what they've heard in the culture about Christianity. How many of you want the definition of Christianity to be either of those two things? 

David Geisler: 

Yes. When you said all that, it reminded me of John 16:12. Remember when Jesus was speaking to his disciples at the end of his life and he said something like this to them. He said, "I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now." 

And the problem, Darrell, is we live in a world in which there are many things that we want to say to our non-believing friends today about Jesus, but unfortunately there's only so much they can actually hear so we need to be sensitive to how we use apologetics. This is an art, and unfortunately, most of the apologist that I know aren't as sensitive in this area. And this is one area that I'm trying to help the body of Christ. I'm trying to help these apologist learn to be a little more sensitive of how they use apologetics, and especially since their primary barrier is not intellectual. The scripture is very clear. Ephesians 4:18, Jeremiah 17:9, First Corinthians 2:14. Ephesians 4:4 says, "The God of this world has blinded their minds." Ephesians 4:18 says, "They're ignorant because of their hardness of heart." If that's the case, then if intellectual barriers are never the primary barrier, then we should be sensitive, more sensitive to how we're using apologetics. And don't whack people over the head with it but use it to remove a barrier so that we can allow the Holy Spirit to begin to penetrate their heart. 

Darrell Bock: 

Yeah, I couldn't agree more. Again, I came to the Lord out of an agnosticism so I remember what it is to think as an unbeliever. And the intellectual ojections, I think, are a shield to either the emotional or will issues that really get in the way of embracing the gospel. 

And so that actually is an important observation, that connecting to the person at a level in which you build some sense of trust for what you're going to say. And this actually introduces my definition of apologetics. This will sound strange perhaps, but my definition of apologetics, because we tend to think of it as the defense of the faith, but it also has this element: it's creating categories for people that they currently don't have. 

David Geisler: 

Oh, I like that. 

Darrell Bock: 

Another way I like to say it is when you talk to an atheist or an agnostic and you say, "The Bible says," or, "God says," you need to recognize they have problems with both the words in that sentence. You aren't communicating anything yet because you're on such different plains in terms of how you're evaluating what's in front of you. Now your job is to say, "How can I create a category for them or at least that opens up towards a category that they currently don't have so that they'll consider it when you say, "The Bible says," or, "God says"? How does that work? 

David Geisler: 

Yes. I say it this way: how can my heart accept what my mind rejects? 

Darrell Bock: 

Yep. Fair enough. 

David Geisler: 

And you have to be sensitive to removing those intellectual barriers that people have. One of the things my father taught me and I use a lot is this: that if you can believe the big miracles, you can believe the little miracles. If you can believe that there's good evidence that there's an intelligent designer who created the universe and He created the universe ex nihilo, out of nothing. If He could do that miracle, Jesus miracles are not a big deal. 

Darrell Bock: 

Yeah, and I like to joke in light of the James Webb telescope and stuff like that, and that miracle gets bigger all the time. The more we understand how vast the creation is, the orderliness of it, the complexity of it, whether I'm thinking macro in terms of the totality of the universe or micro, what goes into making DNA work or something like that, and you sit there and say, "That all happened by accident? Probably not." 

David Geisler: 

And this is how I combine apologetics and evangelism in a book, Conversational Evangelism. We talk about the five planks. The five planks are I'm accountable. See, if there is a God, then we're accountable in some way. You can't deny that. I'm accountable, I can't measure up, I'm a sinner, I need an outside source for help, and I need what only Jesus can give. And if we can help people to understand here's an evangelism element, but then put the apologetics at the very front so that people will understand there's evidence for intelligent creator, and it just makes our gospel presentation a little easier for people to swallow. 

Darrell Bock: 

Yeah, yeah. And another version of the same argument is the idea if God can raise someone from the dead, then that tells you he's got control over life. And life's pretty important to me given that I'm mortal. That's another way into the same space. 

This is fun. Let's talk about First Peter three for a second because this is a core passage that comes up regularly in apologetics. I tell people I don't know of a memory or a system that doesn't have this verse in it somewhere, that, "Set Christ apart as Lord in your hearts and be prepared to give a defense for the hope that is in you." And then the ending part, which some people don't quote when they quote the verse, is, "Yet with gentleness and respect," or gentleness and fear. 

I want to talk about three parts of that passage, the apologetics part to start off with. The idea that Peter, when he has to summarize what our faith is about, parks on the word hope. That's the one word that he chooses, which I think is extremely significant. And then last, the tonal part of how we're engagement, which oftentimes gets ignored. Let's start with the first one, apologetics. What do you know about that word? 

David Geisler: 

Well that comes from the great word apologia, which means to give a defense or reply. It's what a lawyer would do in the courtroom, he would defend his client. And that's what we want to do. But I want to go beyond that because most people get afraid of that word and so they don't do anything. I think the command... It's an imperative. I think the command is more than just when people ask us questions we are to give answers, we're to remove barriers whether people ask us questions or not because that's what the apostle Paul did in Acts 17 at the Acropolis. He didn't wait for them to ask him questions, he removed barriers whether they asked him a question or not. 

And I think sometimes the devil wants us to think that apologetics is answering questions that people ask us so then we can say, "Nobody's asking me questions. I don't even need to have answers." But then if you don't have answers, how can you have hope? How can you provide hope for people? Because if there's no one right answer, Darrell, how can there be any hope? 

My father taught me this principle: A point in every direction is no point at all. If you embrace everything, you stand for what? Nothing. Pluralism cannot be true. We have hope because there is an answer. There's an answer for our sin problem, there's an answer for the transformation problem because the Bible teaches in Romans 8:11 that that same power that raised Jesus from the dead is available to me so I can be a better father to my children, better husband to my wife, and a better spiritual leader in my home. It's a transformation issue that we need to help people to understand, it's not just He's forgiven us of our sins and so we have a ticket to heaven. He wants to transform our lives and He wants to do it now and not wait till we get to heaven. 

Darrell Bock: 

Yep. And going back to your observation about it isn't just waiting till you get asked, I tell people if they will pay attention to the testimonies coming from people who didn't grow up in a Christian home, they will hear something consistently that they need to ponder. And it's this: that somewhere in that testimony there will be the observation that goes, "I met this person," whoever it is, "a Christian whose life was very different than the way I was living. And it made me curious. It opened me up to thinking about the things of God." Someone they worked with, a neighbor that they had, or whatever. And so it was this experiential relational connection that opened the door. 

Remember, we said apologetics was creating categories where they currently don't exist. Well, the first thing you got to do is get person to be open to categories they currently don't have. And that dimension of the testimony opens that up so that how we conduct ourselves and even how we interact with people about our faith, whether they're engaged with us on the particular issue or they're just watching us from a distance, makes a lot of difference in terms of opening up the possibility of considering who Christ is. 

David Geisler: 

I think my skeptical friend was surprised that I cried for him. And I think that that was a powerful apologetic in his life. 

Darrell Bock: 

Yeah, I've heard numerous cases where a person's response to something is, "Well, can I pray for you?" Prayer isn't a normal part of their life, so they're going... But they understand that that's... You just committed to intercede on my behalf, and they connect to that. There are these dimensions of engagement, don't have anything to do with intellectual arguments of apologetics but have everything to do with opening people up so that they'll consider what it is that's being discussed. 

David Geisler: 

Exactly. And that's why there's a distinction between belief that and belief in. And we know it's the Holy Spirit that has to work on helping them to believe in Christ because the evidence alone won't do it. 

Darrell Bock: 

Yeah. The example of belief that versus belief in that immediately popped in my mind is what James says about the devil. The devil believes that God is one, but he doesn't believe the God who's behind it. He doesn't have that faith commitment, that trust and who that one is. Let's shift gears. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. I'm sorry. 

David Geisler: 

I was going to say an illustration I used to explain this, I said when I married my wife, Charlene, I believe that she would make a great wife based on the evidence. I would've never married her unless there was great evidence. But the evidence of why I thought she would make a great wife never forced me to say, "I do," to her. That was a decision of my will. 

In a similar way, that's what happens when we trust Christ. The evidence for Christianity doesn't force us to invite Christ to come in to be a Lord of our life. My father would say it this way. In fact, in the movie he talks about this, that basically when you put your faith in something, you want to look and make sure there's an elevator. If you walk in an elevator, make sure that there is a floor there before you walk in an elevator 

Darrell Bock: 

Better be a button to push. Let's talk about hope for a second. Let me frame it this way: I really think that sometimes the church doesn't take the gospel as being good news seriously enough. And here's what I mean: We're so committed. And there's a reason for this. We're so committed to making people understand their need and their sin that we forget the other half of the gospel message, which is there's a challenge on the one hand. This is why the cross was necessary, because of your sin. But the other half of the cross is the life that's offered and the relationship that's offered on the other side. And the good news isn't merely that your sins are forgiven, the good news is the relationship you get to walk into. And Peter uses the word hope to make sure that the emphasis is on the right syllable, if I could say it that way. 

David Geisler: 

Yes. Yes. And First John 3:2 says that when we see Him, what? We will be like Him, that once we make that commitment to Him, every day we take that step further to be more like Christ. Remember that old commercial? I could have had a V8. It's like when we see Jesus, we're going to say, "Ah, this is what I should have been all along." 

Darrell Bock: 

I could have had a savior. 

David Geisler: 

Yeah. 

Darrell Bock: 

Yeah. Interesting. I just think we underestimate in the way we communicate whether the challenge and the sin and the problem is prominent or whether the hope and the abundant life offer is prominent. And I think if we don't take people to the landing place in when we share, we risk cutting short or making the gospel too small. 

David Geisler: 

Right. Yes, I totally agree with you, that we need to help people to see. It's just not a matter of Christ forgiving you, positionally your sin, but He wants to make that transformation in your life and give you a hope and a future. A lot of people right now, especially during COVID, that feel very hopeless. 

Darrell Bock: 

That's exactly right. Yeah. And the abundant life that's on offer from John 10 tends not to be in view. Okay, let's turn to the last piece here, which is the tone piece directly, the concept of meekness and fear or meekness and respect. You did a nice job in a little piece that you sent me in preparation for this of talking about those two terms, [inaudible 00:41:28]. Tell us about those two terms. 

David Geisler: 

Yeah, well, if I can remember offhand, meekness is more than just gentleness, meekness is an inner disposition. We're not trying to assert ourselves... Well, we're not trying to win brownie points with the Lord. 

Darrell Bock: 

Yeah, there's a humility wrapped up in it. 

David Geisler: 

Yes. Yeah, very much so. I like the word fear rather than respect because someday, Darrell, I'm going to get to heaven and God's going to say, "David, you had been discipled by these men in your life, including your father. What did you do with that? Did you pass it on? Did you make a difference?" And so I see my life in terms of that someday I'm going to be accountable to God for what I do in my life. 

And I think we need to keep that in our mind daily, that we are responsible, Darrell, as Christians. I get so tired of hearing all these stories of Christian men who are failing their congregations. It's mind blowing. We shouldn't even be hearing these kinds of stories. 

Darrell Bock: 

Yeah. This is a little, little, little pushback. And the reason I like respect is because in this particular case, I'm not talking about my relationship to God, I'm talking about relationship and the way I'm interacting with other people. I'm not accountable to another person in the way I'm accountable to God. But I think this word is important. Well, let me say it this way: Sometimes in language, a word is used, and in English we make a differentiation when really there are two elements combined together. And that's the way I think of this term. The reason I respect someone when I'm engaging with them, even if they're coming from a completely different point of view, is I'm respecting the fact that they're made in the image of God and I'm respecting the fact that God has me in this conversation or has me relationally connected to this person because I'm called to love them and I'm called to respect the way in which God has made them. 

David Geisler: 

Yeah, I like that. It's very- 

Darrell Bock: 

And so that's your step towards somebody, if I can say it that way. And that's important because sometimes tonally we can be right but say it in the wrong way or in the wrong spirit or with the wrong edge. And actually, what we're doing is we're not drawing the person towards what we're getting to think about, we've actually pushed them away by the way that we've done it. 

David Geisler: 

It's so true, it is so true. And if we would just think about these things on a daily basis when we talk about how we're using apologetics, I think we would make a lot more progress. 

Darrell Bock: 

Well, I want to thank you. Our time is gone. I want to thank you for taking the time to be with us and to dive into this initial foray into apologetics and think about what apologetics is and the legacy of your dad. Like I said, he was a former colleague of mine for years and had a impact in many organizations and really helped put apologetics in an important way on the map for evangelicals. And to be able to sit and converse with you both about that legacy and your own work in... And what strikes me about your work and talking to you is this tonal piece that you have put your hands around is an important part because the tendency can be in apologetics to not be so tonally sensitive. I really appreciate that about what you've shared. 

David Geisler: 

Well, thank you. Well, thank you for having me on. 

Darrell Bock: 

Yeah. And we thank you for being a part of The Table and joining us. Hope you'll join us again soon. If you want to see other episodes of The Table, you can do that at voice.dts.edu/tablepodcast. We have a whole array of episodes on a whole array of topics because at The Table, we discuss issues of God and culture. And in the back of my head, I'm thinking that means we discuss anything and everything. We hope you'll join us again soon.