Authors: R.C. Sproul, John Gerstner, And Arthur Lindsley
Year: 1984
Pages: 364
ISBN 0310449510
All three authors of this particular effort in apologetics are associated with the Ligonier Valley Study Center. They do not indicate who wrote which sections of the book. However, each author advocates Reformed Christianity. Is it true that a person must accept Christianity on the basis of faith alone? Is there a rational defense of the Christian faith? This is the main ideaof the book by Sproul, Gerstner and Lindsley, namely that Christianity is reasonable and it is rational.
“Classically, natural theology does not stand in contradiction to divine revelation nor does it
exclude such revelation. In fact, natural theology is dependent upon divine revelation for its
content.” (pg. 12)
The book is divided into three sections:
Section one deals with the problems and methods of apologetics. They cover Classical Natural Theology and place it in the crisis of secularism which has worn away at the rational defense of the faith to the “feeling-oriented” appeal to emotional connection. They cover the
task of apologetics, the nature of Natural Theology and Fideism, the Biblical evidence to
confirm Natural Theology and what we as Christians ought to do to confirm our walk up the
mountain of Natural Theology.
Section two deals with Classical Apologetics in relation to Theistic Proofs, the Deity of
Christ, and the Infallibility of Scripture. Here they traverse the theistic arguments for proving
God (Ontological, Cosmological and Teleological) with sturdy persuasion and some new
understandings. The second was very interesting, and providing a great summary of different
arguments, including the ontological, cosmological and teleological arguments for God. This
chapter also has chapters dealing with the Spirit and Word of God.
Section three critiques the Presuppositional Apologetics. The authors outline
Presuppositional Apologetics, show from history the proponents (Augustine, Luther and
Calvin) who held the classical position in variance with Presuppositionalism, and exhibit the
starting point of the primacy of the intellect and human autonomy. Next they cover such
crucial elements as the Noetic influence of sin, the Self-Attesting God and Analogical
Thinking.
It deals with philosophy and apologetics to a greater degree and upholds the classical
positioning in contrast to the Presuppositional apologetics made by Cornelius VanTil.
The authors should be enthusiastically applauded for insisting that Christian faith is capable
of a reasoned defense. They will not compromise an inch with the destructive idea that
heartfelt faith is without intellectual reasons or the idea that to be irrational is a religious
virtue. They maintain that God commands believers to reason with unbelievers, not simply
proclaim that they must make a groundless, subjective choice. This is a sorely needed
emphasis today. We could not agree with it more. On their chosen method of reasoning in
defense of Christianity, though, we must agree much less. We must find it, actually, contrary
to good reasoning.
The book opens by identifying the object of its apologetical concern: namely, "The Crisis of
Secularism" (chap. 1). The central axiom of secularism - and key challenge to Christianity in
our day - is the view that "All possible knowledge is restricted to the temporal" (p. 7). Man
has an unaided intrinsic ability to reach a knowledge of God, they hold that "natural
theology" (the human activity of devising proofs for God's existence) is reflection "dependent
upon divine revelation" (p. 25). They tell us that rational apologetics as "pre-evangelism" can
establish the cognitive clarification of Christianity and bring the natural man to an
intellectual assent, but to take him beyond that to a personal trust in the heart, emotions, and
will is solely the work of the Holy Spirit (p. 21-22).
In the last half of the book, our authors turn to a critique of the presuppositional apologetic,
especially as advanced by Cornelius Van Til. According to the authors, Van Til is a "fideist"
and, as such, holds that God cannot be known through nature and theistic proof, but only by
faith - a faith independent of all rational evidence (p. 27, 34, 35, 185).
I think the way to understand the clash between presuppositional and classical apologetics is
to realize that their conflicting claims constitute a strong case for a paradox in the Christian
knowledge of God. However, since this is a rather intense read about classical apologetics
itnecessitates some contemplation to work thorough. It is an excellent volume on the subject
and I heartily recommend this especially to them who have already become familiar with the
more critical aspects of apologetics.
0 comments:
Post a Comment