I hate to admit it, but I have often been like many apologists: too quick to give answers and too slow to ask questions.
Solomon calls that the approach of a fool:
“A fool does not delight in understanding,
But only in revealing his own mind.” (Proverbs 18:2)
Anxious to win arguments
Like many apologists, I can be so anxious to win arguments by dispensing facts (i.e., by “revealing my own mind”) that I fail to ask questions of my audience (because I don’t “delight in understanding” them enough).
In doing so, I have needlessly quenched discussions and weakened my apologetic efforts. If instead, I had first sought to truly understand them, my words would have been more like “apples of gold in settings of silver”—and thus “sweeter” and more winsome (Proverbs 25:11 and 16:21).
Accordingly, I’ve been challenged to “ask before I answer.”
Choosing to ask questions
In this spirit, a while ago, while at breakfast with a professor of evolutionary biology (whom I anticipated would question the truths of Christianity because of his belief in biological evolution) I chose to ask questions and listen courteously to his responses before providing answers.
I mentioned to him that—as a chemist—I face little opposition from those engaged in the creation/evolution cultural war. Chemists, after all, have as their guiding mantra the rather non–controversial Periodic Table of the Elements, developed in the1870’s by the great Russian chemist Dmitri Mendeleev.
More controversial
In contrast, Christian physicists (who adhere to the Big Bang Model of cosmology and its requisite 13.8 billion years) and biologists (who adhere to biological evolution and its requisite 3.7 billion years) can face strong opposition.
Ask the person on the street about the Big Bang or the theory of evolution and you will likely encounter a heated response. Ask them about the Periodic Table and you will most likely encounter a bored, hollow stare.
I pointed out to my biologist colleague that the Periodic Table is important—but not absolutely essential—to the chemistry research enterprise. After all, the alchemists of the Middle Ages had operated without it, as did the gifted chemists who followed the alchemists but preceded Mendeleev. The Periodic Table simply makes chemistry research more efficient.
Is it possible…?
I then asked him if, by analogy, it is possible to pursue biology research without using the theory of evolution as an operating model.
As I had hoped, rather than generating resistance or hostility, the question engendered a warm and curious response—because it was properly contextualized and delivered in a courteous and genuinely interested spirit.
The question caused him to ponder the indispensability of the theory of evolution—if not its accuracy.
Enter into productive conversations
By taking this approach, I accomplished my goal—to generate thought with a courteous but challenging question, thereby deepening our friendship. My objective was not at all to challenge the veracity of evolutionary theory. My point was to use questions about the theory of evolution to enter into productive conversations with my colleague regarding his assumptions and conclusions about the big questions of life.
I am still learning and growing in this area; but I see that a step in successful witnessing is realizing my goal is not to win an argument or present convincing material, but to respect the other person in love and ask probing questions to help them open up to question their own assumptions and presuppositions in new ways.
