Recalcitrant Reason Requires a Firm Foundation

September 24, 2015

by Scott Oliphint

In the past three articles, I tried to respond to one particular objection to a Reformed approach to apologetics. That objection centers on a supposed confusion in Covenantal Apologetics between epistemological and ontological principles. There is much more that can be said about that objection, but it’s best that we move on now to the next objection.

The next objection to a Covenantal (presuppositional) approach to apologetics is stated this way:

Presuppositionalists claim that the Word of God is self-authenticating. It needs no proof. It is the basis for all other conclusions, but it has no basis beyond itself. But what they fail to see is that while all of this is true of the Word of God, nonetheless, it is not thereby true of the Bible. For there must be some evidence or good reasons for believing that the Bible is the Word of God, as opposed to contrary views.

The proper concern of the objection is that, for example, the Qur’an claims to be the Word of God, as does the Bible. How, then, can one accept the latter claim while rejecting the former one? Won’t we need reasons for accepting the Bible and for rejecting the Qur’an as the Word of God?

…continue reading at Reformation21.

Scott Oliphint

Dr. Oliphint (PhD, Westminster) is professor of apologetics and systematic theology at WTS.

Next Post...

Keeping the Faith: 1 Timothy 1:18–20

September 16, 2015

by Kent Hughes