Best Apologist Ever?

Given my work in Biblical studies, my interest in religion and science, my taste in music and my sense of humor, you may not be surprised that I think that I may have found my all-time favorite “apologist”:

Let me know what you think…

"I have finally managed to get hold of Gullotta's article. It's a good read, and ..."

What Happens When You Review Richard ..."
"Obviously The Gospel of Thomas is a prime example of Jesus’ teaching using one-liners. So, ..."

New Age Translation of the Lord’s ..."
"From the Magarik piece:It is easy to recognize the foolish evil of the Green Bible ..."

Bible Nation around the Blogosphere
"Thanks for sharing that interpretation, Phil. I always feel more informed after your posts! I'm ..."

Matthew’s More Radical Beatitude

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Walter

    He convinced me! LOL

  • TimberWolf

    I think we have a new approach to Apologetics here that just might work 😉

  • BSM

    Well it's the first time I've ever heard an apologist drop the "F-bomb". :-)The argument from profanity?

  • Sabio Lantz

    Devastating !

  • J. L. Watts

    I couldn't get past the 'divide by 3 – that's the Trinity' bit. Ugh!

  • James F. McGrath

    I'll bet if you try watching it again knowing it is parody you might manage to watch a bit further. Believe me, the treatment of the "Genesis creation story" is worth hanging in there for. :)

  • Matt Kelley

    the real question is which creation account is from the P (Peter Gabriel) source and which was from the D (Phil CollDins) source1+1=JesusisthesonofGodawesome

  • James F. McGrath

    We can either call them P1 and P2 or G and C – your call. :)

  • Fr. Chris Larimer

    P1: Nothing is better than love.P2: A ham sandwich is better than nothing.Q1: A ham sandwich is better than love.(That was this guy's formal logic dissertation.)

  • Oliver

    This was just f**king hilarious.Thanks for sharing! :)

  • Tripp

    sometimes the facts just speak. science is a big thing and he knows how to use it. oh yes he surely does.

  • Richard


  • newenglandsun

    Using your definition of an apologist, it seems that anyone who maintains to the traditional teaching of the apostolic Church is going to be an “apologist”. Even if they are actually a philosopher. Even if they reject Biblical literalism. Even if they study religion. Goodness, you speak so much on fundamentalist Christians but I don’t think I’ve ever seen any quotes from Martin Marty who’s written about over 3,000 pages of work on this subject.

    • James F. McGrath

      I don’t think you got that the video is satire. “Apologist” in our time has come to mean something very different from – and much more disappointing than – what it meant in the early church. As for Martin Marty’s writings, I regularly read them, and pass them on on Facebook and Twitter, as I appreciate what he has to say.

      • newenglandsun

        No. I got that the video was satire. I’ve seen this guy before.

        Yes, it is a shame how the word “apologist” has been distorted by those in our times such as Ravi Zacharias.

        Apologists in the times of the early Church defended the Christian Tradition that we have today – Trinity, Deity of Christ, Theosis, etc.