# What are the methods of fideist apologetics?



## John Bunyan (Aug 7, 2012)

I was trying to find out a copy of "Pascal's Wager: Pragmatic Arguments and Belief in God" after reading Pascal's Pensées - couldn't find it ): - and that got me thinking: How do people that try to defend their faiths in the so-called "Fideist Method" try to convince others? I know about Pascal's Wager (and the book seems to imply that some James made a wager too) and appeals to "look how much Jesus can change your life!", but is there any other organized way of arguing in this method?


----------



## jwright82 (Aug 7, 2012)

John Bunyan said:


> the book seems to imply that some James made a wager too



Not all James did.


----------



## Apologist4Him (Aug 8, 2012)

The method of fideism is persuasion. Historically Christian apologists whom have emphasized faith include: Martin Luther, Blaise Pascal, Søren Kierkegaard, Karl Barth, and Donald G. Bloesch. Fideist apologetics emphasizes reasons of the heart, the personal and experiential aspect of knowledge. Fideist apologists focus on supernatural reality which goes beyond Science. Concerning the "problem of evil" fideist apologists in response emphasize the need to trust God. Fideist apologetics in method and approach has much in common with the mindset of the typical preacher and sermon, which is to say fideist apologetics is not without merit. However I would suggest that it is incomplete as a method and approach. One of fideism's strengths, a humble view of reason, is also one of it's greatest weaknesses. While the fideist is right to point out the limitations of logic and reason (and knowledge), a fideist apologist may be be so critical of reason as to nearly outright reject it, in favor of personal revelation and a personal experience with God. Unfortunately, fideism plays right into the hands of personal relativism, and while there are relative truths (chocolate is my favorite flavor), fideism undermines the reality of absolute and objective truths (A cannot be both A and non-A at the same time in the same sense). Finally, all too often, Reformed apologetics has been mistakenly labeled as a form of fideism.


----------

