Presuppositional Apologetics

Areas of Critique

Rhetorical style:

Often begins a new section stating major Christian truths that Bible believing Christians would endorse.

This sets the stage for the underlying view that in order to remain faithful to God, His Word, and these doctrines, one must adhere to presuppositional apologetics. Descent to his apologetic task is akin to rejecting these key doctrines.

Text Criticism

The idea of simply presupposing the Word of God begs the question, what exactly is the Word of God?

To simply presume we have the Word of God is to forgo, and thus undermine, biblical textual criticism. This is the process of determining which words or phrases are the Word of God. There are approximately 400,000 variants in the New Testament. Not all variants are minor (though the lion share is). Some variants are important, though none challenge any significant doctrine. Some key passages textual criticism is essential for are the ending of , the woman caught in adultery (), and the Trinitarian text found in ).

Pragmatism

Bahnsen claims that alternate apologetic methods are “doomed to failure.”

If this is the case, then this should be apparent. However, rival apologetic methods are flourishing. Evidentialism (Josh McDowell), Classical (Craig, Geisler), and others are the main apologists known to most people familiar with apologetics.

The impact of non-presuppositional apologetics on non-Christians is at least comparable to presuppositional apologetics if not outright greater. In fact, this author would go so far as to say that presuppositional apologetics is highly prized by the choir (Christians) but does not carry the impact to non-Christians (a necessary measure of the pragmatics).

“You can’t eat your cake and have it too.”

The case of Francis Schaeffer (and Nancy Pearcey)

The presuppositional apologist will gladly accept that these two provide a high impact....yet reject them as presuppositional apologists! No!!