Difference between revisions of "Presuppositional apologetics"
(New page: '''Presuppositional Apologetics''' is form of Christian apologetics that deals with presuppositions. 1 A Christian presuppositionalist presupposes God's existence and argues from that pe...) |
Conservative (talk | contribs) |
||
| (46 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Presuppositional | + | [[File:Cornelius Van Til.jpg|thumb|200px|right|[[Cornelius Van Til]] is often called the father of presuppositional apologetics.]] |
| − | <ref>http://www. | + | '''Presuppositional apologetics''' is "a branch of [[Christian apologetics]] that deals with presuppositions."<ref>[http://www.carm.org/apologetics/presuppositional.htm ''Presuppositional Apologetics''] CARM. 5 May 2008</ref> Presuppositional apologetics is frequently used to rebut [[atheism ]](see: [[Atheism and presuppositional apologetics]]). |
| + | |||
| + | James M. Harrison summarized and explained the purpose of Christian Presuppositional Apologetics when he wrote the following concerning its role in the discipline of Christian apologetics: | ||
| + | {{cquote|That which I will attempt to describe in this article is known as presuppositionalism. It is an apologetic method which has had the most impact in Reformed circles, and is most closely associated with [[Cornelius Van Til]], [[John Frame]], and the late [[Greg Bahnsen]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | I should begin by pointing out that the Presuppositional Apologetic does not discount the use of evidences in apologetic reasoning. It does not use evidences in the traditional manner, however. By the traditional manner, I mean using evidences as an appeal to the authority of the unbeliever's autonomous reasoning. The problem is, of course, that the unbeliever cannot reason autonomously. Without [[God]], there would be no possibility of reason. And so the reality of the matter is that every time the unbeliever attempts to reason, he is borrowing from the [[Christianity|Christian]] worldview. That is, he is being inconsistent with his stated presuppositions. And that is the crucial point. Ultimately the intellectual conflict between believers and unbelievers is a matter of antithetical worldviews. The essence of the Presuppositional Apologetic is the attempt to show that the unbeliever's worldview drives him to subjectivity, irrationalism, and moral anarchy. And so the Presuppositional Apologetic calls for the Christian and non-Christian to set side by side their two worldviews and do an internal examination of them both in order to determine whether or not they are consistent even within their own framework. Since God does exist, and since Christianity is true, then any worldview which denies these truths are false and can be demonstrated to be so.<ref>http://www.gospeloutreach.net/papol.html</ref>}} | ||
| + | ==Greg Bahnsen and Gordon Stein Debate== | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[Image:Bahnsen.jpg|thumb|150px|Dr. Greg Bahnsen became known as the "man atheists fear most" due to Michael Martin's cancellation of their scheduled debate.]] | ||
| + | In 1985, [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] Dr. Greg Bahnsen and prominent proponent of atheism Gordon Stein had a debate at the University of California, Irvine regarding the positions of [[atheism]] and [[theism]]. John Frame wrote regarding the debate in which Dr. Bahnsen used the [[transcendental argument for the existence of God]] that "In the end, Stein walked and talked like a broken man."<ref>http://www.frame-poythress.org/frame_articles/Bahnsen.htm</ref> The Greg Bahnsen-Gordon Stein debate was recorded and transcribed and was dubbed "The Great Debate".<ref>[http://prosapologian.wordpress.com/2007/08/15/great-debates/]{{dead link}}</ref><ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20080920175044/http://www.bellevuechristian.org/faculty/dribera/htdocs/PDFs/Apol_Bahnsen_Stein_Debate_Transcript.pdf</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Greg Bahnsen and Michael Martin== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Dr. Greg Bahnsen became known as the "man atheists fear most".<ref>http://mywebpages.comcast.net/webpages54/ap/biobahn.html</ref> | ||
| + | This is because [[Harvard]]-educated [[Michael Martin|Dr. Michael Martin]] was scheduled to debate Bahnsen but pulled out of the debate at the "eleventh hour". | ||
| + | A press release at the time said that Dr. Martin offered ruses on why he pulled out and didn't want the scheduled debate recorded but the real reason was that "...Michael Martin is afraid that he will be publicly humiliated just as his friend and fellow atheist, Dr. Gordon Stein, was..." (see: [[Press release after Michael Martin pulled out of Martin-Bahnsen debate]]). | ||
| + | |||
| + | Martin later released his [[transcendental argument for the non-existence of God]] (TANG) in 1996 which was rebutted by Christian apologists.<ref>http://www.reformed.org/apologetics/index.html?mainframe=/apologetics/martin_TAG.html</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==See also== | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[[Atheism and Debate]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[[Atheism and epistemology]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[[Cornelius Van Til]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[[Evidential apologetics]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[[Classical apologetics]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[[Integrated apologetics]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==External links== | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[http://frame-poythress.org/presuppositional-apologetics/ Presuppositional Apologetics] by John M. Frame | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[https://presupp101.wordpress.com/articles/ Pesuppositionalism 101] | ||
| + | |||
| + | Videos: | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqMpflXOQnQ This Is How You Do Apologetics (Presuppositional Apologetics) - Dr. Greg Bahnsen], video | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_ReJvs_QrE Presuppositional Apologetics - Simply Explained], video | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u5d5BC1Y7o Greg Bahnsen Debates R.C. Sproul (Presuppositional Apologetics vs Classical Apologetics)], video | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJ79GCNIzDE Why Is “Presuppositional” Apologetics Superior To “Classical/Evidential” Apologetics?], video | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRUT5JtnSmw R.C. Sproul - The Inherent Logical Discrepancies Within the Presuppositional Apologetic (1 of 2)], video | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI_GLw5EgEY R.C. Sproul - The Inherent Logical Discrepancies Within the Presuppositional Apologetic (2 of 2)] | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
| Line 6: | Line 57: | ||
| − | [[Category: | + | [[Category:Christian Apologetics]] |
Latest revision as of 22:21, May 6, 2024
Presuppositional apologetics is "a branch of Christian apologetics that deals with presuppositions."[1] Presuppositional apologetics is frequently used to rebut atheism (see: Atheism and presuppositional apologetics).
James M. Harrison summarized and explained the purpose of Christian Presuppositional Apologetics when he wrote the following concerning its role in the discipline of Christian apologetics:
| “ | That which I will attempt to describe in this article is known as presuppositionalism. It is an apologetic method which has had the most impact in Reformed circles, and is most closely associated with Cornelius Van Til, John Frame, and the late Greg Bahnsen.
I should begin by pointing out that the Presuppositional Apologetic does not discount the use of evidences in apologetic reasoning. It does not use evidences in the traditional manner, however. By the traditional manner, I mean using evidences as an appeal to the authority of the unbeliever's autonomous reasoning. The problem is, of course, that the unbeliever cannot reason autonomously. Without God, there would be no possibility of reason. And so the reality of the matter is that every time the unbeliever attempts to reason, he is borrowing from the Christian worldview. That is, he is being inconsistent with his stated presuppositions. And that is the crucial point. Ultimately the intellectual conflict between believers and unbelievers is a matter of antithetical worldviews. The essence of the Presuppositional Apologetic is the attempt to show that the unbeliever's worldview drives him to subjectivity, irrationalism, and moral anarchy. And so the Presuppositional Apologetic calls for the Christian and non-Christian to set side by side their two worldviews and do an internal examination of them both in order to determine whether or not they are consistent even within their own framework. Since God does exist, and since Christianity is true, then any worldview which denies these truths are false and can be demonstrated to be so.[2] |
” |
Greg Bahnsen and Gordon Stein Debate
In 1985, Christian apologist Dr. Greg Bahnsen and prominent proponent of atheism Gordon Stein had a debate at the University of California, Irvine regarding the positions of atheism and theism. John Frame wrote regarding the debate in which Dr. Bahnsen used the transcendental argument for the existence of God that "In the end, Stein walked and talked like a broken man."[3] The Greg Bahnsen-Gordon Stein debate was recorded and transcribed and was dubbed "The Great Debate".[4][5]
Greg Bahnsen and Michael Martin
Dr. Greg Bahnsen became known as the "man atheists fear most".[6] This is because Harvard-educated Dr. Michael Martin was scheduled to debate Bahnsen but pulled out of the debate at the "eleventh hour". A press release at the time said that Dr. Martin offered ruses on why he pulled out and didn't want the scheduled debate recorded but the real reason was that "...Michael Martin is afraid that he will be publicly humiliated just as his friend and fellow atheist, Dr. Gordon Stein, was..." (see: Press release after Michael Martin pulled out of Martin-Bahnsen debate).
Martin later released his transcendental argument for the non-existence of God (TANG) in 1996 which was rebutted by Christian apologists.[7]
See also
External links
- Presuppositional Apologetics by John M. Frame
Videos:
- R.C. Sproul - The Inherent Logical Discrepancies Within the Presuppositional Apologetic (1 of 2), video
References
- ↑ Presuppositional Apologetics CARM. 5 May 2008
- ↑ http://www.gospeloutreach.net/papol.html
- ↑ http://www.frame-poythress.org/frame_articles/Bahnsen.htm
- ↑ [1][Dead link]
- ↑ https://web.archive.org/web/20080920175044/http://www.bellevuechristian.org/faculty/dribera/htdocs/PDFs/Apol_Bahnsen_Stein_Debate_Transcript.pdf
- ↑ http://mywebpages.comcast.net/webpages54/ap/biobahn.html
- ↑ http://www.reformed.org/apologetics/index.html?mainframe=/apologetics/martin_TAG.html