For the Christian, the mind of God (found in His Word) should ground and permeate our philosophy, and any other discipline we may engage in. Herein lies the differences in apologetic methodologies. So…
An interview with Dr. Scott Oliphint was released today from Christ the Center, on the topic and titled of his book Reasons for Faith: Philosophy in the Service of Theology.
Click here to listen to the interview, and don’t miss the articles linked on this page.
One more thing…
Last night, I noticed that J. Warner Wallace of STR and Please Convince Me, commented on some reaction to his new book by a “presuppositionalist.” What stood out what this comment, by Wallace “If the missionaries had taken the approach offered by some of my presuppositional brothers, I might have trusted the Book of Mormon without testing.” I am glad that Mr. Wallace qualifies his statement with “some…presuppositional brothers”.
The point of Mr. Wallace’s post, is that evidential apologetics is what convinced him. Again, he does qualify this by stating that “…I have repeatedly affirmed the role that God plays in first removing the enmity that all of us have in our natural, fallen condition. I’ve never argued that humans begin from a position of neutrality. I think we are, instead, aligned against God until he does something to remove our hostility.” Amen, brother! He then states “But once that has occurred, I do believe the role of evidence is critical.” Me too, and no Van Tillian, presuppositionalist, Covenantal apologetist should have any trouble with this. As a matter of fact, as I recently stated, that since this is God’s world, everything in it (every bit of evidence, fact, etc.) must point to His existence and the truthfulness of the scriptures. Now, to qualify that statement; it is with a mind being sanctified to think God’s thoughts after Him, that we see God’s work in the heavens, the earth, the sea, and all that in them is. Which is why, we as Christians, should be some of the best scientists, etc.
Mr. Wallace ends his piece by stating, “I’m grateful for my evidential detective inclinations because they guided me to the truth. God moved first, I responded with the evidence God provided. I’m at home with evidentialism because the evidence brought me home.”
Mr. Wallace seems to acknowledge that God “moved first”, but then ends up with the idea that the (plain) evidence is what finally convinced him, or in his own words, “brought me home.” Now, I’m not exactly sure what he means by “brought me home,” but I’m convinced, that what Mr. Wallace meant to say, is that it was God, working through the evidence, that brought him home. God uses means (such as the preaching of the word) to bring us to faith, but it is always, the Spirit working through these means.
I would recommend our readers (and J. Warner Wallace) to check out the recent article by Nathan Shannon titled Christainity and Evidentialism: Van Til and Locke on Facts and Evidence. If presuppositionalists are against evidence, then I’m no presuppositionalist, but the fact of the matter is, this is God’s world, and he has made himself known (Roman 1:18-26).
With that said, although not having read it, I would encourage you to check out J. Warner Wallace’s new book Cold Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels. Congratulations Mr. Wallace on this publication, please continue to show us, how all the facts of the universe, point to the true and living God.
Update: Joshua Whipps comments on Wallace’s post here.
