Help with Apologetics Field-Based Activity: Cults

APOL500

APOL 500

Apologetics Field-Based Activity: Cults Template

Do not change any aspect of this form; and do not delete anything from this form. Instead, just type your content in the spaces provided, below. Before typing your content, you should review the entire document to be sure you understand what is required.

Type your name here:

Instructions for this submission

The purpose of the activity is to provide you with an opportunity to construct a short argument for orthodox Christianity against a cult while anticipating possible objections to that argument and then sharing that argument “in the field.” In the sections provided below, you will insert your constructed argument and possible objections; you will enter the date, time, setting, and short description of the person with whom you share the argument; and a short reflection on the sharing experience.

1. Construct a short argument for orthodox Christianity against a cult while anticipating possible objections.

a. Type below the list, the name of the cult that you will be addressing (limit yourself to one of argument):

The following cults are discussed in the Gould textbook.

Mormonism

Jehovah’s Witnesses

If your self-selected argument dealt with one of these cults then you might want to choose a lesser known Christian cult. For an alternative cult, contact your professor for approval of that alternative.

a. Lay out your argument as you plan to use it in the conversation you will be having.

b. Anticipate two to three possible objections to your argument and how you would address those objections in a short conversation.

2. Sharing your argument for orthodox Christianity against a cult.

a. Identify the time and place in which you had the conversation.

b. Identify the setting (coffeeshop, online, text, etc. It must, however, be a conversation and not a monologue):

c. Identify your conversation partner (no names please): unbeliever, believer; uncertain; knowledge level, attitude of partner (antagonistic, interested, doubtful, devil’s advocate).

3. Reflection in which you describe how the conversation went, the reaction of your conversation partner both during and after the presentation of the argument, what you might have done differently, and how you feel after presentation about the strength of the argument.

a. Describe details about how the conversation went.

b. Describe the reaction of your conversation partner both during and after the presentation of the argument.

c. Describe what you might have done differently.

d. Describe what you feel after the presentation about the strength of the argument.

Page 2 of 2

Page 2 of 2