Classical and Reformed Epistemology of Apologetics

In our class in Apologetics, our professor shared to us the topic about Classical and Reformed Epistemology of Apologetics where the two major apologists involved here were William Lane Craig; for the former, and Kelly James Clark; for the latter. Back there he shared to us the position of some apologists where he quoted paragraphs from our main material/article and then he discuss why we should disagree or why is it need to be furtherly elaborated. But in this short blog of mine, I will just give my ideas and reflect on some parts where we discuss the topic about Classical Apologetics.

Before I proceed to my objective, I would like to briefly share my knowledge about Classical Apologetics. As far as I can recall, Classical Apologetics is one of the five views in Apologetics that we first discussed in our Apologetics class. In my little understanding about this, this view and use of Apologetics can move someone to the phase of faith from the phase of complete unbelief and this is by means of presenting historical evidences of the resurrection of Christ. By presenting first natural theology like moral arguments, the apologist is establishing a foundation why one should believe in the existence of God. Second, he will appeal to them with Christian historical evidences about Christ and His resurrection, which is I think the most indispensable part. William Lane Craig is the representative for this school of Apologetics.

“Knowing Christianity to be true and showing Christianity to be true”

I think what I just said above about the approach of Classical Apologetics is the essential and the secondary role of reason, which is the natural theology and Christian evidences. And also, I think it has something to do with the relationship between faith and reason. Faith, I think, is knowing Christianity to be true, and reason is, showing Christianity to be true. From what I have learned from my professor back in Christian Theology 1 which he also mentioned here in his blog, and I think this is his conclusion in the relationship between faith and reason, that faith and reason complements each other. They go hand in hand, and showing also that faith is not superior over reason, and vice versa.

As how I understand it, reason plays an important role as a helping/helpful tool not just in our showing of Christianity to be true, but also plays an important part in ourselves of knowing Christianity to be true. It implies that without reason, it is impossible for us to believe or have “faith”. But of course, I don’t mean to neglect here the very crucial role of the Holy Spirit why an individual can believe. I know that it is only by His work that a person can be able to understand things from above. What I mean here is it simply says that, when we first believe in God, we didn’t just believe irrationally or without a proof or evidence. There plays the secondary role of reason in the form of Christian evidences. But without the inconceivable work of God the Holy Spirit, all these things are impossible.

“Must a person accept Christianity on faith alone, or is there a reasoned defense for being a Christian?”-this is the introduction from the book “Classical Apologetics” of the late R.C Sproul, and the other Classical Apologists. From what I have learned, there is a rational reason why a person accepts Christianity, and it is not by faith alone that he accepts it. Christianity is eminently reasonable as what all the Christian apologists agree with, and I know all of us, if we truly are in Christ, would definitely agree with this.

Right now, because of this article, I am kind of torn between Presuppositional Apologetics and Classical Apologetics. I find the latter kind of convincing. One of the things I learned, that I should be open to continue study the other views of Apologetics and not quickly make an adamant decision of standing in neither one.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ethics as Apologetics through Interdisciplinary Approach

  In the mind of Tsung-I Hwang, he wanted to develop for an alternative methodological framework of Apologetics. In his search, he leaned for insights on various academic disciplines such as Christian Theology, Philosophy, Psychology, Anthropology, and to other social scientific studies wherein he developed an alternative with a framework of ethical issues, common ground towards indirect apologetics, presuppositional method, and common solution. Tsung-I Hwang did all of these for the very reason that the classical method of apologetics that time doesn’t seem to fit well in the Asian context. He finds Evidential Apologetics to be ineffective and flawed. This apologetical stance seems to undermine or closes potential dialogue with the non-Christian people. This is why he made an alternative for he learned that ethics should be the common ground which he thinks the starting point. Before I continue, I would like to share my brief knowledge about Evidential Apologetics. As far as I can...
Read more

Five Views on Apologetics: An Introduction

Apologetics, as defined by Steven B. Cowan; “the defense of the Christian faith against charges of falsehood, inconsistency, or credulity.” At first, I only have a little idea what apologetics is. All I know is that in it, you have to argue or debate with other people about what they know regarding religious matters. Little did I know that it is what people do, especially religious people in order to defend what they claim to be true. And in Christianity, we also have this practice, and knowing apologetics is also a must. Apologetics, derived from the Greek word “apologia” which was used before as a speech to defend oneself or a reply to a message. It was a practice in the ancient world in their courtrooms after an accusation is given, the defendant was given a time to refute the accusation making his defense or his “apologia”. I can still remember some of my Greek vocabularies of which I learn from my Greek Subject. The Greek word “apo” is a preposition word which means “away”, whil...
Read more

The Task of Apologetics: Nature and Necessity

Being thrown with false accusations is an inevitable experience a true follower of Christ will encounter in his life. It is an ugly experience a normal person does not want to undergo through. The reason why all of us Christians will never escape from being slandered by the world is because we serve and worship Christ and our faith is centered to Him, as well as our new identity as a new creation can be found in Him. During the New Testament time, Apostle Paul and other followers of Christ, and ancient believers had experienced to be falsely accused and severely suffered because of it. Even our Lord Jesus Christ has experienced the same thing in the hands of the Pharisees and the Sadducees when he was led into the Jewish Sanhedrin to face his trial before the high priest and to the religious authorities (Mark 14:55-56). And from these examples of being falsely accused, we can be so certain that this thing can possibly happen to all of us. As Bahnsen gleans a powerful lesson for 20 ...
Read more