Ever try to converse with someone with whom you strongly disagree? If their thought-world, or vocabulary, is internally consistent and works well to describe and order their world, you will seldom make much headway.
Richard Rorty, in discussing the uselessness of attacking the Correspondence theory of Truth, puts it this way:
The trouble with arguments against the use of a familiar and time-honored vocabulary is that they are expected to be phrased in that very vocabulary.
If that’s the case, how can one make headway? – I think you have to take the long way ’round. We aren’t doing geometry proofs, you know.
You have to first be able to present an alternate vocabulary which is internally consistent and pragmatic and then build a good enough relationship with the person to allow them to listen to your vocabulary and see it in practice.
But notice that the actual argument, though necessary, takes a back seat to relationship.
And that, my friends, is the importance of Love in apologetics.