Why Presuppositional Apologetics?

In part three of this series on apologetics, I argue that presuppositional apologetics is the best system for defending the faith.


When understood and practiced rightly, presuppositional apologetics (PA) is the only apologetical framework that consistently operates under the authority and light of Scripture. Therefore, I think it the best way to defend and proclaim the faith to the glory of God.

PA distinguishes itself from other apologetical frameworks by accurately submitting to a few key biblical doctrines. First, PA unashamedly admits that apologetics/argument is not sufficient to regenerate the heart; instead, it teaches that the gospel is the only power to save (Rom 1:16). In other words, PA submits to monergistic salvation, for only God has the power to grant faith (Eph 2:9); salvation is of the Lord alone (Lam 3:26). PA also submits to a biblical doctrine of conversion, namely that the Spirit uses the Word to regenerate the soul (Jas 1:18, 1 Pet 1:23-25, Rom 10:17). The offensive tactics of PA are intended to destroy vain speculation and render the unbelievers’ excuses folly (2 Cor 10:5) so that the gospel might be more clearly understood and believed. Truly, deconstructing unbelief is a major component of PA, but it is not ultimate; the proclamation of Christ is the goal (1 Cor 2:1-2) for there is no other means by which the God saves. In freely admitting this limitation, PA functions properly as the handmaiden to evangelism and aims to glorify God not in winning arguments, but in winning souls to the glory of God through calling the unbeliever to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. It avoids the weakness of other apologetical methods that can focus so much on convincing the mind that they miss the transformation of the heart.

Second, PA has a biblical anthropology that understands the unbeliever’s spiritual deadness as well as his dignity as made in the image of God. Because sinners are under the curse, they cannot see or revere God, no matter how persuasive the argument. In addition, their minds are corrupt and depraved (Rom 1:26), utterly unable to make spiritual judgments (1 Cor 2:14). In light of this truth, PA does not seek to appeal to the unbeliever as if he could be an unbiased judge of reality. To do so would be to ignore Scripture’s teaching, and would be asking the unbeliever to do what is impossible. Sinners are enslaved to sin and left to themselves will always, in every circumstance, choose sin over God (Rom 6:20).

Simultaneously, PA teaches Christians to respect all people as rational, moral, and communicative beings with dignity and respect, because all people are made in the image of God. Scripture commands believers to persuade unbelievers about Christianity’s truthfulness (2 Cor 5:11), to contend earnestly for the faith (Jude 3), to use rhetoric, logic, humor, pathos, reason, as instruments to bring a soul to Christ (Acts 26:3, 2 Cor 5:20). Treating an unbeliever seriously instead of haphazardly or patronizingly glorifies the God in whose image he is made. But PA puts all of these tools in their right place—under the authority of the Scripture, for God is ultimate, not man. He is the final appeal and the ultimate authority; He judges men, and men cannot judge Him.

There are two primary criticisms made against PA: (1) it relies upon circular reasoning and (2) certain practitioners can be brash and unloving. PA presupposes that God and His Word are the highest authority. Critics of this apologetic say that it is illogical and unconvincing to posit the Scriptures as the ultimate authority before proving such. To this, presuppositional apologists respond that the Scriptures are truth because the Scriptures say so (2 Tim 3:16, John 17:17). Critics retort that this is circular reasoning, and therefore invalid.

In most cases, circular reasoning is fallacious. Saying, “I’m right. Why? Because I said so,” is not a very convincing argument! This is because typically one makes an argument by appealing to an authority greater than oneself (Heb 6:16)—not by appealing to oneself as the authority. In other words, “A is true because of B, and B is true because of C,” and so on, with each appeal being made to a greater and greater authority. In common argumentation, circular reasoning is fallacious. But there is one situation in which it is not fallacious, but in fact necessary: when appealing to ultimate authority. If ‘Z’ is the ultimate authority, there is no higher authority ‘A’ to appeal to prove that ‘Z’ is greatest; because that would make ‘A’ more ultimate than ‘Z.’ For the Christian, there is no greater authority than God Himself. This is why Hebrews 6:13 says, “…since He could swear by no one greater, He swore by Himself.” Because He is ultimate, God uses logical circular reasoning and invokes Himself as the final arbiter, the last appeal, the ultimate authority. The presuppositional apologist does the same, and points to God’s Word, from the very mouth of God (2 Tim 3:16) as revelation from God, the perfect standard and sum of truth (Psalm 19:7). Scripture is consistent with itself, in accord with reality that God has made, and attested to by the ultimate authority Himself.

An unbeliever may reject this answer, yet he himself is also guilty of circular reasoning about ultimate authorities. His ultimate authority is himself—his knowledge, learning, and understanding—and his proof is because he says so! Every philosophical system must be circular in order to be consistent. Materialists point to secular materialism to prove their hypotheses; rationalists use their rational abilities to prove their rationality; empiricists use their empiricism to interpret their empirical data. Here, presuppositional apologists can show the folly of placing fallible, finite, sinful man as the foundation of truth (Matt 7:27), and point to the trustworthy, righteous, holy God as the Almighty God of Truth (Ex 34:6). Without Him, there is no foundation for any knowledge of thought. Apart from Him, everything devolves into imbecility and irrationality. But in Him, there is the treasure of wisdom and knowledge (Col 2:3), steadfastness, and a solid place on which to stand (Matt 7:25).

Secondly, some critics of PA reject the framework because they see some of its advocates as argumentative and harsh. Admittedly, just like all people, presuppositional apologists have a sinful nature! Speaking truth does not justify having a sinful heart. Scripture commands us to defend the faith with gentleness and reverence (1 Pet 3:15), and to answer opposition with patience and gentle correction (2 Tim 2:22-25). We are to have speech wrapped up in love (Eph 4:15), marked by kindness, humility, and tenderness (1 Cor 13:1-5). It dishonors the Lord when we fail to be like Christ, even while defending Him. Every Christian who subscribes to PA must take these biblical commands seriously.

But even if a presuppositional apologist sins while defending the faith, it is in spite of his apologetic, not because of it. PA, at its heart, seeks to win precious souls to Christ, not to merely argue with unbelief. PA confesses that only God can save, and that more forceful arguments don’t translate into more, or faster, conversions. If arrogance, unrighteous anger, harshness, brutality, malice, or hateful speech come out of a presuppositional apologetic, the guilt lies with him, not with his apologetic framework.

At the same time, the critic must see that biblically gentleness does not mean fleeing from all conflict. Jesus and the apostles faced opposition boldly, courageously, and truthfully (Matt 23, Acts 4). Scripture commands pastors to both exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict (Titus 1:9), which demands argument. Love is not opposed to truth; in fact, it rejoices in it (1 Cor 13:6). Meekness is not weakness, and every Christian has the sacred duty to not neuter the convicting power of the Word of God. So, the presuppositional apologist must contend for the faith, full of grace and truth as the Lord Jesus Christ was. He must love God and men, be tough and tender, be mighty and meek, be courageous and compassionate. The Lord Jesus Christ was nothing less, and when we follow His footsteps, He is pleased.


Adapted from an essay written for a seminary course on evangelism and apologetics, Fall 2021.

Previous
Previous

Theodicy: Answering the Problem of Evil

Next
Next

What is Presuppositional Apologetics?