LIBERTY UNIVERSITY JOHN W. RAWLINGS SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
The Dynamic of Apologetic Dialogue
A Paper Submitted to
the Faculty of the School of Divinity
in Candidacy for the Degree of
Doctor of Education in Christian Leadership (Ed. D) Department of Christian Leadership and
Church Ministries
By
Mary Gracias
Lynchburg, Virginia
5/2022
The Dynamic of Apologetic Dialogue
Apologetics may happen at many different levels, from the highly formal and intellectual
(e.g. debates with leading atheist thinkers, presentations in universities and parliaments) to the
highly informal and less strictly intellectual. Much of what follows in this section presumes the
more informal interactions that every believer should expect to engage in through the normal
process of life as described in 1 Peter 3.
The aim of this section is to reflect on the dynamics of a conversation with a non-believer.
Based on 1 Peter 3:13-16 and on personal experience we can consider the constituent parts of
this interaction:
A context
The context in which an apologetic interchange takes place is vital to the dynamic of the
conversation. This works at a number of levels:
a) – how well you know the other person and theThe relationship between the two persons
nature of your relationship will affect the way you interact and how direct and deep you feel
you can be. The dynamic will be very different if you are speaking with a close relative, a
lifelong friend, a neighbour, a casual acquaintance, a work colleague or a person with whom
you have just sparked off a conversation.
b) – depending on the place, time and social setting you are in you mayThe immediate situation
have greater or lesser freedom to talk at length and at a more personal level. Consider the
difference between a crowded room or two people alone in a living room or the difference
between a party and a funeral.
c) – every interaction happens within a wider social, cultural and historical The wider context
context. Conversations may be freer in an open liberal democracy compared to a closed
society. Recent events in the news may be the catalyst for a conversation and will likely inform
and shape the way it unfolds. Different cultures will appreciate and permit different degrees of
informality and directness. Where the social and cultural gap is greater between the two parties
