Stated and Defended Indeed This is truly an exceptional work on presuppositional apologetics. Complementary to his book, Van Til's Apologetic: Readings and Analysis, which is a comprehensive address of what presuppositional apologetics is, in this work Bahnsen offers an outright defense of presuppositional apologetics and a critique of those who have mistakenly been labeled as presuppositionalists. Part one addresses the method and defense of presuppositional apologetics as the only Biblically and theologically consistent approach to defending the faith. In chapter one, Bahnsen sets forth the presuppositional method and forcefully shows how presuppositionalism is (and must be) part of Christian theology. He demonstrates in chapter two the foundation for Christian presuppositionalism, namely revelational epistemology, and gives ample Scripture references to this effect. It must be said that if one is familiar with Bahnsen's writings or lectures, up to this point most of the material is nothing more than a heavy review, which seems very repetitive at times. However, in chapter three Bahnsen really pushes revelational epistemology to another level, effectively demonstrating the impossibility of divorcing one's metaphysic from one's epistemology. He shows that one must already know something about the state of affairs (metaphysics) before he establishes a criterion of how he can proclaim his beliefs justifiable (epistemology). One must know in order to know. This argument transitions perfectly into the presuppositional view that the unbeliever does know God (even while suppressing that knowledge); and his worldview is tainted by that metaphysic even though it is professed otherwise in his epistemology. Bahnsen then goes on to show (as Frame has done in his perspectivalism) that not only is one's epistemology undivorcible from one's metaphysic, but both are undivorcible from one's ethic. This only further shows the presuppositional implications in defending the faith - that the apologist must get straight to the heart of the matter and show that the unbeliever cannot give a rational account for his unbelief - epistemologically, metaphysically, or ethically. He then shows the foolishness of autonomous epistemology (contrasted to revelational epistemology) from both a Biblical and philosophical standpoint.
Part two of the work focuses on showing the inconsistencies of certain apologists who historically have been labeled presuppositionalists but in practice have shown themselves to be otherwise. While being gracious to these men and quoting extensively in areas where he agrees with their works, Bahnsen maintains a critical approach toward them and is unrelenting in his push for revelational epistemology as a presupposition. Chapter four focuses on Gordon Clark and illuminates his true apologetic as being (roughly stated): (A) The best worldview will be the most logically consistent. (B) Christianity is the most logically consistent. Therefore, Christianity is the best worldview and should be adopted. Similarly, chapter five focuses on Edward J. Carnell and shows his true apologetic to be (roughly stated): (A) The best worldview will be the most internally coherent. (B) Christianity is the most internally coherent. Therefore, Christianity is the best worldview and should be adopted. Finally, chapter six discusses the beloved Francis Schaeffer and shows his true apologetic as thus (roughly stated): (A) The best worldview will give the most satisfactory answers to life. (B) Christianity gives the most satisfactory answers to life. Therefore, Christianity is the best worldview and should be adopted. In each of these chapters and culminating in chapter seven Bahnsen shows that these men establish a criterion for the best worldview - apart from Scripture - and then try to argue from the Scriptures that Christianity passes the test and should be considered the best worldview among all competitors. Suffice it to say, Bahnsen argues that true presuppositionalism establishes that it is not only the best worldview but the only worldview that will allow anyone to make sense out of anything. He further critiques these men on their internal inconsistencies with their respective views and shows the inadequacy of their ability to actually defend those views. He argues that, at best, all they have done is argued for the probability of Christianity rather than the certainty of it - and even in that they have not done a thorough job. Because no one knows when a worldview that will better fit their criterions will come along and how many of those worldviews exist, who can say that Christianity really is the 'best' worldview? Bahnsen concludes his book with a review that true Biblical, presuppositional apologetics always argues for the certainty of Christianity and the fact that it is the only viable worldview, not merely the most probable. The three appendices following the book are somewhat helpful, but did not really add a whole lot to what Bahnsen already addressed. For someone seeking simply to understand the basics of presuppositional apologetics and practical examples of how it works, I would much more refer them to Bahnsen's Always Ready: Directions for Defending the Faith than this book. But I highly recommend this book to be read by all who would teach presuppositional apologetics or to those who have a great desire to learn it more on the intellectual side. A good working knowledge of logic and philosophy is helpful to the reader but is not necessary. |
Categories
All
|