Hip and Thigh: Smiting Theological Philistines with a Great Slaughter. Judges 15:8

Monday, July 02, 2012

Starting Points with Evidence

A brief comparison of the ultimate presuppositions we bring to the apologetic enterprise. Taken from Clifford McManis's wonderful book, Biblical Apologetics: Defending and Advancing the Gospel of Christ. [Review forthcoming].

The discussion on evidences exposes the inescapable reality that we need to always get back to ultimate presuppositions. What is the ultimate basis by which any person bases reality? What is the person's ultimate standard of authority? Is it God's Word or human reason? Is Scripture probably true because we can "prove" it to be so? Or is Scripture provable because it is true? Two different questions - two different presuppositions - two different approaches to apologetics.

Consider more examples of the clash between the presuppositions of Traditional Apologetics (TA) verses Biblical Apologetics (BA):

TA = The Bible is God's Word because it can be proven by evidences.
BA = There are evidences because the Bible is God's Word.

TA = The Bible is God's Word because it is logical
BA = The Bible is logical because it is God's Word.

TA = The Bible is God's Word because of the impossibility to the contrary.
BA =All contrarian views are impossible because the Bible is God's Word.

TA = The cosmological argument makes sense, therefore God probably exists.
BA = God absolutely exists, therefore the cosmological argument makes sense.

TA = There is universal morality, therefore God exists.
BA = The God of the Bible certainly exists, therefore there is universal morality.

Biblical Apologetics: Advancing and Defending the Gospel of Christ (452-453)



Blogger Ken said...

That is the best concise statement I have ever read of the issue between the debate between evidentialist methods and presuppositional methods of apologetics. thank you very much; very helpful.

11:00 AM, July 09, 2012  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home