Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Depends on who I am talking to. So... combination.
I don't disagree, but is it all presuppositional? What about what I mentioned above 1 Cor. 15 when Paul is showing the evidence of the eyewitness of Christ post-resurrection?
I couldn't say they used Classical Apologetics as it wasn't really invented yet...
So the question becomes, which apologetic method can we subscribe to and rightfully claim absolute certainty?
Any one of them.
We're reasoning from a perspective of faith seeking understanding---faith is a given here for us. What we are attempting to do is to show the unbeliever that this faith is as rational as his.
I should note, I'm not referring to rational apologetics in the classical sense, nor evidences in the evidential apologetics sense as they are commonly understood.
The unbeliever does not have a rational faith
What do we prove if we show the unbeliever our faith is as rational as his or hers?
The question is why archaeology, classical proofs, etc cannot be used? If Christianity is correct, then all of these sorts of arguments actually do presuppose it.
Would you be rational in believing if you were not regenerate?
That there is a clear choice: either Christ is the Son of God who was raised on the third day, or He is not. And that believing affirmatively is a rational position, perhaps even the rational position. At that point, either God will remove the scales from their eyes or He will harden their heart. The thing that we must see, though, is that we cannot prove God, at least not in the sense of convincing someone---only the Holy Spirit convinces and convicts.
I don't disagree, but is it all presuppositional? What about what I mentioned above 1 Cor. 15 when Paul is showing the evidence of the eyewitness of Christ post-resurrection?
Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves. (John 14:11, ESV)
When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. (John 20:20)
Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe." (John 20:27)
"Thus says the Lord GOD: Are you he of whom I spoke in former days by my servants the prophets of Israel, who in those days prophesied for years that I would bring you against them? But on that day, the day that Gog shall come against the land of Israel, declares the Lord GOD, my wrath will be roused in my anger. (Ezek 38:17-18)
(Joh 14:29) And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.
(Joh 13:19) Now I tell you before it come, that, when it is come to pass, ye may believe that I am he.
I would think I were rational...not that I could give an account for rationality.
If I were unregenerate, I would go with any one of the naturalist theories concerning Christ's resurrection, along with the naturalist theories of the Bible.
The same applies to other ontological, teleological, scientific arguments, archaeology, etc.