PAPER NO. 93

THE LOGIC OF APOLOGETICS

The Goal, the Method, the Content

  1. The Goal

    1. The goal of Christian Apologetics is determined by the goal of the Christian life: the knowledge of God is the good, man’s chief end, which is eternal life.
    2. Christian Apologetics seeks to remove all obstacles to the knowledge of God. “We demolish arguments and every pretension that raises itself up against the knowledge of God” (2 Corinthians 10:4-5). Every objection includes internal and external objections, as well as objective proofs and subjective persuasion.
    3. Christian Apologetics assumes and seeks to defend the Christian Worldview of creation–fall–redemption:

      1. Creation: creation is revelation: the basic things about God and man and good and evil are clear to reason so that unbelief is without excuse (Romans 1:20). Apologetics requires us to show the clarity of general revelation.
      2. Fall: man is fallen; he is in a state of sin and death: no one seeks God, no one understands, no one is righteous (Romans 3:10-11). The noetic effect of sin is such that man neglects, avoids, resists, and denies reason in the face of what is clear in order to retain his autonomy.
      3. Redemption: man is called back from sin and death by the curse and promise. God imposes the curse of toil and strife and old age, sickness and death on man to restrain, recall from and remove moral evil. The promise is that through a spiritual war (between belief and unbelief) that is age-long and agonizing, good will overcome evil.
    4. Christian Apologetics seeks to take all thoughts captive to the obedience of Christ (2 Corinthians 10:5) resulting in the earth being filled with the knowledge of God as the waters cover the sea (Isaiah 11:9).
    5. Thinking by nature is presuppositional: we think of the (logically) less basic in light of the more basic. If we agree on the more basic we can and will agree on the less basic. Apologetics seeks to apply this principle to resolve philosophical and theological disputes.
  2. The Method: Rational Presuppositionalism

    1. Thinking by nature is presuppositional: we think of the less basic in light of the more basic: meaning in light of reason; truth in light of meaning; experience in light of basic belief; finite and temporal in light of the infinite and eternal; conclusion in light of premises.
    2. Reason as the laws of thought is most basic; it is self-attesting; it cannot be questioned because it makes questioning possible. Reason is authoritative for all thought.
    3. The application of reason as the test of meaning to basic beliefs (presupposition) is Rational Presuppositionalism (RP). Critical thinking examines uncritically held assumptions. RP is critical thinking applied more consciously and consistently.
    4. Presuppositions are basic beliefs used to give meaning to experience. No experience is meaningful without interpretation. We interpret experience in light of basic beliefs. Basic beliefs can and should be tested for meaning.
    5. RP is distinct from mere presuppositionalism: the latter is belief without proof (fideism); the former is belief based on understanding.

RP is distinct from mere rationalism; the latter uses reason constructively without first using it critically, and also uses reason as a source of truth rather than as a test for meaning.

RP is distinct from all forms of empiricism: common sense (naïve realism which takes appearance for reality); intuition (inner experience, mysticism, or spontaneously arising beliefs—sensus divinitatis); science based on empiricism (the claim that all knowledge is from sense experience alone).

  1. Rational Presuppositionalism Applied

    1. Common Ground (CG) consists of the set of conditions necessary for thought and discourse: reason, integrity, RP and the Principle of Clarity (PC). To begin with what is most basic, one must begin with CG. There is no naked public square. Common Ground is not neutral ground.
    2. General Revelation (GR) consists of what can be known of basic things by all men everywhere at all times. Philosophy asks the most basic questions based on GR. RP in GR must first deal with epistemology (clarity and inexcusability), then metaphysics (the nature of God and man), and then ethics (the moral law grounded in human nature).
    3. Special Revelation in Scripture (Genesis 1–3) affirms creation–fall–redemption. Creation must be understood before one can understand the Fall. Redemption is to be understood in light of creation and the Fall. The life of Abraham must be understood in light of what comes before (Genesis 1–11). The book of Revelation must be understood in light of all else that comes before, beginning with Genesis and clear GR.
    4. Hermeneutics (interpretation, understanding the meaning of) is contextual (the less basic in light of the more basic). It is neither literal (without context) nor allegorical (using foreign context). There are several layers of context: first clear GR, then the Biblical worldview of creation–fall–redemption, then what came before in history, then the book, chapter, sentence, and word. The less basic is connected to the more basic by reason (using good and necessary consequences). Understanding also comes by connecting related and relevant parts of knowledge to see the picture in full dimension.
    5. In theology, doctrines which divide the Church can be resolved by having foundational doctrines in place: clarity and inexcusability, sin and death, curse and promise, repentance and faith, justification and sanctification, baptism and calling, resurrection and reward.
  2. The Content: Understanding Clear General Revelation

If one understands the clarity of GR then one can:

  1. Show the necessity for clear general revelation.
  2. Show there must be something eternal, and, only some (God) is eternal (vs. material monism, spiritual monism, and dualism).
  3. Show the nature of God (infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth) and show man is the image of God (in the sevenfold aspect of human nature).
  4. Show how the moral law is clear, comprehensive, and critical by showing how the moral law is grounded in human nature and how the moral law from GR is the same in content as the Decalogue from SR.
  5. Show the necessity for and existence of SR from clear GR.
  1. The Content: Addressing Divisions Within Theism

    1. Show God is creator and ruler (vs. deism).
    2. Show vicarious atonement in Biblical revelation vs. post-Biblical Judaism.
    3. Show Christianity and the clarity of general revelation vs. Islam.
    4. Show the Historic Christian Faith in the Church’s councils and creeds vs. divisions within Christianity.
    5. Show the Theological Foundation (The Seven Pillars) vs. divisions within Christianity.

Conclusion

RP Apologetics differs from other forms of Apologetics by its goal (it is opposed to all that is raised up against the knowledge of God), by its method (it secures agreement by understanding the (logically) less basic in light of the more basic), and by its content (it addresses all objections to theism and all divisions within theism).


© 2017 Logos Papers Press