Out of Context

Peter was in favor of Apologetics.

but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, (1 Peter 3:15)

Right there where it says "make a defense" the Greek word is ἀπολογία -- apologia -- the origin of our word, Apologetics. That word is not "apology" as in "I'm sorry." It refers to a verbal defense or a reasoned argument. It was basically a courtroom term, the way your lawyer would argue for you. Thus, to Christians "Apologetics" refers to the reasoned defense of the faith, and we like it because, after all, it's in the Bible.

There are a few, of course, who aren't sold on the idea. Mostly not that they don't like it; it's just that they don't seem to get the hang of it. You have to know too much. You have to sift together philosophy and rules of logic with archaeology, history, science ... the whole gamut of this stuff. "Can't we just preach Jesus?"

I think, however, that this is a misunderstanding ... on both sides. If you were paying attention, my quote above started without a capital letter and ended with a comma; it's not a complete sentence. That should be a warning that we are not getting the context.

Peter is listing a whole bunch of instructions to "a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light." (1 Peter 2:9) Instructions include everything from "Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution" (1 Peter 2:13) to suffering for righteousness' sake (1 Peter 3:8-20). That last section, verses 8-20, starts with "Finally" and it is in that final set of instructions that we find verse 15. It includes commands for unity, brotherly love, not repaying evil for evil and seeking peace. Peter says, "Who is there to harm you if you are zealous for what is good? But even if you should suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed." (1 Peter 3:13-14) It is here that we pick up the sentence in question.

Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. (1 Peter 3:14-16)

I know it's a lot, but I hope you can begin to see the context so that you can begin to understand the text. The context is suffering. Our job, here, is to honor Christ the Lord as holy. Our job is to retain a good conscience. Our job is to be holy ourselves. Our primary aim is to "proclaim the excellencies of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light." The direction of the text is inward -- we need to be a reflection of Christ and to be prepared to suffer and to know that we are blessed for it -- and outward in the sense of being good witnesses for Christ. In that we should know why we believe. Why? Well, if we are examples of all that is good and we suffer for it, people are going to want to know why we're maintaining such a good attitude. We need to be able to tell them why. That is the concept.

I'm not saying that the formal field of Apologetics is a bad thing. Not at all. But the formal field is not for everybody. We are called to suffer for Christ and rejoice. We are called to be prepared to tell others why we rejoice in suffering. And, oh, by the way, we're supposed to do all that "with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience." When Apologetics advocates do it with fierceness and glee at defeating their enemies, it just doesn't seem like "gentleness and respect." When we fight for our cause, is that "gentleness and respect"?

We are supposed to be holy as God is holy. We are supposed to live godly lives as ambassadors for Christ. We are supposed to be ready to give an answer as to why we have hope in Christ. That may include a philosophical discussion, a logical train of thought, or a robust argument (or arguments). In all cases, though, we are ambassadors for Christ, His representatives, where our deeds and our words glorify Him. We are to "proclaim the excellencies of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light." When Apologetics supersedes that, we're not doing what Peter was talking about. When are not giving a reason for the hope that we have with gentleness and respect, it's called sin. Obviously defending the faith by sinning makes no sense at all.