Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,392
edits
Changes
no edit summary
Some of the arguments relied upon for proofs of God's existence are the [[cosmological argument]] and the [[teleological argument]]. The cosmological argument attempts to prove that God exists by stating that there has to be an uncaused cause of all things. That uncaused cause is God. The teleological argument uses the analogy of design; that is, the universe and life exhibit marks of design. Therefore, there must be a Designer. Other times, strict evidence is used to establish Christianity's validity. Of course, both aspects are also combined in classical apologetics.<ref>[https://carm.org/classical-apologetics Classical Apologetics] by Matt Slick</ref>}}
Some of the arguments relied upon for proofs of God's existence are the [[cosmological argument]] and the [[teleological argument]]. The cosmological argument attempts to prove that God exists by stating that there has to be an uncaused cause of all things. That uncaused cause is God. The teleological argument uses the analogy of design; that is, the universe and life exhibit marks of design. Therefore, there must be a Designer. Other times, strict evidence is used to establish Christianity's validity. Of course, both aspects are also combined in classical apologetics.<ref>[https://carm.org/classical-apologetics Classical Apologetics] by Matt Slick</ref>}}
Bible.org declares about Classical apologetics states:
{{Cquote|In the previous chapter we surveyed a number of apologists working in the classical tradition. Although they vary among themselves especially on the extent to which they use deductive or inductive arguments to formulate their apologetic as a whole, all emphasize the importance of showing the theistic worldview to be reasonable in order to present the evidences for the facts of Christianity effectively to nontheists. It is this methodological principle, however differently understood and applied, that typifies the classical apologetic approach. In this chapter we consider how this principle is related to various crucial areas of human knowledge that have an important bearing on the truth claims of Christianity.
'''Rational Tests for Determining Truth'''
In the classical approach, there is no substantive conflict between faith and reason. The Christian worldview is a reasonable faith, a step into the light of reason and truth rather than a leap into the darkness of irrationality and subjectivity. To show this reasonableness, classical apologists stress the need to compare and evaluate conflicting worldviews by means of certain epistemological criteria, chief among which is logical consistency or rationality. This does not mean that classical apologists are pure rationalists in their epistemology. All would be quick to acknowledge that rationalism per se (according to which, reason is the sole test of truth) is an inadequate approach to religious knowledge. Rationalism wrongly elevates human reason to the level of an ultimate arbiter of truth. Moreover, because God transcends the universe, the human mind cannot arrive on its own at substantive knowledge about God.<ref>[https://bible.org/seriespage/6-classical-apologetics-reasonable-faith Classical Apologetics: A Reasonable Faith]</ref>}}
== See also ==
== See also ==