Presuppositional Apologetics: Yay or Nay?

[BarneyFife]

Personally, I believe there is a place for it. The Theology is sound enough on the surface, however, some believe it is the only proper method. I disagree. Maybe in a perfect world, but then we're pretty far removed from that, aren't we? The flaws in PA seem to be the lack of recognition that we are servants and actually indebted to others because of our knowledge of God and also that many PA practitioners seem to believe the first thing a new Christian should do is to immediately begin practicing PA (and PA only) on others. One key to personal evangelism is found in John ch. 4 when Jesus asks the Samaritan woman for a drink of water. In most translations, it looks like He is giving her an order, but in reality He is urging His need for her help in quenching His thirst. People don't like charity, as a rule, and respond better when they feel they have the upper hand. If we are to gain their trust (which we need, to have a meaningful presentation of the Gospel), we must set them at ease. Years ago, I went to a week-long training program for lay evangelists and the way outreach was conducted was to go door-to-door taking religious surveys. We were instructed never to begin with "Hi, I'm conducting a religious survey..." but always "Hi, my name is ________ and I wonder if you could help me..." The object was to subdue all personal ego and appear needy, so to speak, and always assume a humble servant posture, so that the subject feels they have something you need (a completed survey) rather than that you have something they need (the Gospel). All this is done while watching and praying for an opening to share Jesus. The PA method is virtually an opposite approach. The premise is that anyone who doesn't know Christ is in rebellion and fully aware of it. This is only half-true many times. If PA were used exclusively, many people would be lost who could have been saved.

 

[bbyrd009]

id say in a what we now call a "church" maybe, even an Inc one, PA might have a place, but imo one should eventually come to a place where that need is overcome? We all pretty much start with "Jesus died for our sins," right, iow we all start under the law, and i guess most Xtians never get past that--who here wouldnt be calling the cops right away if their car was stolen, etc? So iow apologetics end up being excuses, even if they make good "teaching" aids for someone just starting their walk, maybe

if you posted a PA i might could show the point better, dunno, but it should be obv on some level that "presuppositional" = "eating the fruit of the tree?"

 

[theefaith]

Is that different than propositional apologetics? Propose a doctrine then defend it from scripture?
Such as the perpetual virginity of Mary!
Is 7:14 a son (singular)
Thanks

 

[DNB]

Personally, I believe there is a place for it. The Theology is sound enough on the surface, however, some believe it is the only proper method. I disagree. Maybe in a perfect world, but then we're pretty far removed from that, aren't we? The flaws in PA seem to be the lack of recognition that we are servants and actually indebted to others because of our knowledge of God and also that many PA practitioners seem to believe the first thing a new Christian should do is to immediately begin practicing PA (and PA only) on others. The PA method is virtually an opposite approach. The premise is that anyone who doesn't know Christ is in rebellion and fully aware of it. This is only half-true many times. If PA were used exclusively, many people would be lost who could have been saved.

As you said, there definitely is a time and place for it, to that point that, whatever approach or method one uses for evangelization, invariably, one must return to PA, sooner or later.
That is, I would never begin a conversation with an atheist employing PA tactics. I would invariably start with evidential logic, which ultimately, must resolve to PA rhetoric. For, after all has been said and done, things are as they are, because God designed it so i.e. logic, knowledge, memory, physics, rationale, dialectics, etc. There is no escaping this premise, and we must use the pre-established foundations just to initiate a discussion on any subject matter. But, there are many ways to get there. Thus, diplomacy and context are the variables that are flexible, but God's glory is the ultimate goal, which, I believe, is underscored when we recognize and utilize the principles of PA argumentation at some point in the discussion.