Stephen Mumford said, “It is tempting when metaphysics is under attack to retreat to some ground that is easier to defend. In doing so, however, it may no longer be metaphysics that is being defended.” Mumford, while certainly no Christian theist, has a salient point regarding Christian apologetics. I think there is value in recognizing that certain dire consequences regarding Christianity’s truth and God’s existence do not necessarily follow from some purported claims (e.g., evolution). However, we must be careful to avoid trimming Christianity so much that we distort the central truths of the Gospel. Even in our pragmatism, we must maintain that God is a Trinity, Jesus is God the Son and the Son of God, that he lived a sinless life, died on the cross for the sins of the world, and God raised him from the dead. We must hold that the Word of God is authoritative, and that salvation is by grace through faith. If we fail to do this, and retreat to a position more easily defended, then I am afraid we will no longer be defending mere Christianity at all.