A Solid Defense of the Faith

[TylerRay]

I have a coworker that I would like to give a book which makes a positive case for Biblical Christianity. The coworker is an agnostic, so it is the whole system of Christian truth that needs to be defended.

Most of the apologetic books I have or know much about teach Christians how to defend the faith. What I am needing is a positive defense of the faith that can be given for evangelistic purposes.

Any suggestions?

 

[MW]

John Gerstner's Reasons for Faith is clearly written and provides all the classical arguments in a well presented form. As an evidential work it fails to articulate the "faith seeking understanding" approach, but it accomplishes its major aim of providing "reasons" for faith.

It appears to be available online here: https://archive.org/details/reasonsforfaith012962mbp

 

[Reformed Fox]

I would suggest "What's So Great About Christianity?" and "Miracles". The latter does not so much "prove" Christianity as show it to be perfectly reasonable via a lengthy discussion of miracles, namely the incarnation and resurrection. The former is excellent but it was written by Dinesh D'Souza and some might view him as a political schemer of sorts. And both these texts have a somewhat popular tone.

Also, what is your co-worker looking for? Does Christianity merely need to be shown as the best among the "available" alternatives or does every central Christian claim need to be defended? Traditional apologetics (such as the "Summa Theologea") philosophically justify Christianity whereas more contemporary works dedicate more time to undoing the atheism and logical positivism of modern intellectuals. What sort of approach do you think would be most beneficial?

 

[TylerRay]

Has anyone read Sproul's "Reason to Believe?" How does it compare with Gerstner?

 

[TylerRay]

Also, what is your co-worker looking for? Does Christianity merely need to be shown as the best among the "available" alternatives or does every central Christian claim need to be defended? Traditional apologetics (such as the "Summa Theologea") philosophically justify Christianity whereas more contemporary works dedicate more time to undoing the atheism and logical positivism of modern intellectuals. What sort of approach do you think would be most beneficial?

He seems to have bought into most of the popular ideas about Christianity. The Bible is full of contradictions. Christianity is not philosophically sound. The Bible is not historically reliable. You can have morality without God.

What he needs is a nice, comprehensive defense that is readable and designed for the average bloke.

 

[Jack K]

readable and designed for the average bloke

So what you need is not the kind of deeper academic fare generally preferred by us PuritanBoard folk, but one of the more popular apologetic books of recent times that's still essentially orthodox and intelligent. The tone must be right. The author's ability to relate is at least as important as the points made.

Keller does an excellent job in The Reason for God of stating the objections a typical, educated Westerner feels must make Christianity wrong. Then he affirms those feelings as far as they are appropriate, critiques them where they're inappropriate, and shows how Christ actually is the better answer to what the reader is feeling. There's logic, too, but his strength is in addressing gut reactions, much as C. S. Lewis did.

Strobel has more of an evidence-based approach in The Case for Christ. His strength is addressing what the reader thinks must make Christianity untenable. He then shows how the evidence actually supports the Bible's story. This approach is more logical, less empathetic.

Both guys have a winsome approach (very important) that shows they understand how today's agnostic already thinks and feels. In terms of tone, they are ahead of Sproul, who has excellent content but still comes off sounding like you ought to be reading his book as part of a Bible study group.

 

[earl40]

John Gerstner's Reasons for Faith is clearly written and provides all the classical arguments in a well presented form. As an evidential work it fails to articulate the "faith seeking understanding" approach, but it accomplishes its major aim of providing "reasons" for faith.

It appears to be available online here: https://archive.org/details/reasonsforfaith012962mbp

Not to sidetrack the OP but the above hit me very hard yesterday in that I lost a friend that morning. I feel as if there is a huge hole in my heart knowing that he (the deceased) was not a member of any church where he could receive the "faith seeking understanding". In the future I shall use the evidential work of God to attempt to get every person to a good church where all our souls are saved. I write this knowing the methods used in our culture (lay evangelism) are simply a load of rubbish to save souls.

 

[RamistThomist]

My thoughts:

1) Finding a popular book yet one that cogently advances arguments for Christianity is tricky.
2) While I reject Gerstner's method, his primers are usually fun to read.
3) Strobel's works are good, but they are quite technical in some aspects.
4) Peter Kreeft's works are fun.

 

[timfost]

In addition to the recommendations above, always remember to pray (I often don't resort to prayer first). Regardless of the soundness of evidential apologetics or any other method of defence, there can be no change of heart apart from the Spirit's work.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

One could use the nice materials located here:

http://www.firstprescolumbia.org/sot

 

[MW]

Not to sidetrack the OP but the above hit me very hard yesterday in that I lost a friend that morning. I feel as if there is a huge hole in my heart knowing that he (the deceased) was not a member of any church where he could receive the "faith seeking understanding". In the future I shall use the evidential work of God to attempt to get every person to a good church where all our souls are saved. I write this knowing the methods used in our culture (lay evangelism) are simply a load of rubbish to save souls.

Earl, I am sorry to hear of this sad news. May the Father of mercies be your comfort!

 

[Reformed Fox]

He seems to have bought into most of the popular ideas about Christianity. The Bible is full of contradictions. Christianity is not philosophically sound. The Bible is not historically reliable. You can have morality without God.

What he needs is a nice, comprehensive defense that is readable and designed for the average bloke.

As to morality without God, "Mere Christianity" is very good, but somewhat weaker on other areas of apologetics. "The Abolition of Man" makes an very nice for objective morality but never mentions Christianity specifically. "The Big Book of Bible Difficulties" is a massive text which deconstructs effectively every "contradiction" found in the Bible.

I would suggest "Mere Christianity" as a starting point and then maybe "Miracles" if the case needs to be made for Christianity. "Miracles" is more intellectual and attacks Hume and the "rational" case against the supernatural. If modern ideology needs to be discredited first "What's so Great About Christianity?" is good but a bit more confrontational.

Unfortunately, I cannot think of any books which defend all the avenues from which Christianity comes under attack. The texts above are a decent starting point.

 

[RamistThomist]

Abolition of Man is CS Lewis's unsung classic. He actually anticipates transhumanism.