Lesson 4 - Fideist, Presuppositions, Eclectic

Question 1

What distinguishes the Fideist approach to apologetics from other approaches?

Answer 1

• Negative approach to apologetics

- Christianity is accepted as a matter of faith, not reason

Question 2

What are the rationales given for the Fideist approach to apologetics?

Answer 2

1. The Bible does not try to prove the existence of God; it simply assumes it.
2. Most Christians do not come to faith on the basis of rational arguments, evidences, etc.
3. The object evidence for Christianity is ambiguous and far from decisive.
4. Christianity is not like a scientist hypothesis that needs to be confirmed by evidence.
5. The God of the Bible is incomprehensible and transcends human reason.
6. It is possible to show something is true without being able to prove its true.
7. Christians do need to justify their faith; they only need to preserve their faith.

Question 3

What is the 2 step approach to Presuppositionalism?

Answer 3

1. ) Show that the non-Christian’s presuppositions undermine rational thought
2. ) Show that the Christian’s presuppositions support rational thought

Question 4

What are the rationales given for the Presuppositional approach to apologetics?

Answer 4

1. Christians should not try to argue for their faith from a neutral standpoint.
2. It is impossible to argue for anything from a neutral standpoint.
3. Both Christians and non-Christians have presuppositions that they bring to any debate.
4. How people interpret facts and evidences will depend on their presuppositions.
5. What people consider “reasonable” or “credible” will depend on their presuppositions.
6. One has to refute non-Christian’s presuppositions in order to defend Christianity.
7. One has to show the Christians presuppositions cannot be likewise refuted.
8. One’s apologetic method should challenge human autonomy rather than accommodate it.
9. One’s apologetic method should be consistent with the doctrine of Self-attesting Scripture.

Question 5

What are the strengths of Presuppositional apologetics?

Answer 5

1. Presuppositionalism is formulated in the context of a biblical epistemology.
2. Presuppositionalism rejects “the myth of neutrality” and the notion that human reason is autonomous.
3. Presuppositionalism takes seriously the noetic effects of sin and the relationship between natural revelation and special revelation.
4. Presuppositionalism is concerned to avoid accommodating the unbeliever’s assumed autonomy and to challenge it head-on as part of its apologetic argument.
5. Presuppositionalism is concerned to avoid undermining the self-authenticating nature of the Bible.
6. Presuppositionalism recognizes that everyone has a worldview that determines how one interprets and evaluates “facts” and “evidences”.
7. Presuppositionalism recognizes that standards of truth and reason can vary across worldviews.

Question 6

What are the weaknesses of Presuppositional apologetics?

Answer 6

1. Spend more time talking about how to do apologetics than doing it
2. Make grand claims about what their argument does without making the argument
3. Harder to understand than traditional approaches
4. Can be reluctant to give any other argument for apologetics than Presuppositional arguments
5. Presuppositional apologetics is sometimes stated in such a way that it seems to rule out any kind of apologetics by ruling out any common ground between the believer and unbeliever.

Question 7

What are the strengths and weaknesses of Eclectic apologetics?

Answer 7

Strengths

1. An approach that advocates the best tool for the job makes sense
2. It is not restrictive in the way that others methods can be
3. Eclectic apologists are typically out doing apologetics while everyone else is still inside talking about doing apologetics.

Weaknesses

1. Does not give much thought to apologetic method and to what implications a biblical epistemology might have for how one should practice apologetics.
2. A pragmatic approach to apologetics leads to a lack of coherence and sometimes a lack of discernment.
3. The basic problem is that it does not adequately connect apologetics with theology.