Apologetics

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(recat:Philosophy)
m (Christian apologetics)
Line 10: Line 10:
 
: This method of apologetics relies on philosophical arguments to support the existence of a god and builds upon those foundational arguments with additional arguments designed to support specific Christian claims.  An example of Thomistic apologetics is the [[natural-law argument]].
 
: This method of apologetics relies on philosophical arguments to support the existence of a god and builds upon those foundational arguments with additional arguments designed to support specific Christian claims.  An example of Thomistic apologetics is the [[natural-law argument]].
 
; Evidentialist
 
; Evidentialist
: This method relies on empirical evidence (historical evidence as well as archeology, cosmology, biology and other sciences) to build arguments which attempt to justify belief in God, miracles and other supernatural claims of Christian theology.  A good example of evidentalist apologetics is the myriad of arguments for a young earth or universe.
+
: This method relies on empirical evidence (historical evidence as well as archeology, cosmology, biology and other sciences) to build arguments which attempt to justify belief in God, miracles and other supernatural claims of Christian theology.  A good example of evidentalist apologetics is the myriad arguments for a young earth or universe.
 
; Presuppositional
 
; Presuppositional
 
: This method asserts that belief in god and the truth of revealed scripture ([[The Bible]]) are foundational assumptions. Beginning with those assumptions, the presupposionalist attempts to rationally justify Christianity, defend Christianity from attack, and attack perceived flaws in other worldviews.  An example of presuppositional apologetics is the [[Avoidance of hell|avoidance of hell]] argument.
 
: This method asserts that belief in god and the truth of revealed scripture ([[The Bible]]) are foundational assumptions. Beginning with those assumptions, the presupposionalist attempts to rationally justify Christianity, defend Christianity from attack, and attack perceived flaws in other worldviews.  An example of presuppositional apologetics is the [[Avoidance of hell|avoidance of hell]] argument.

Revision as of 15:13, 31 January 2009

Apologetics is the systematic defense of a position. The term comes from the Greek word apologia (ἀπολογία) which means "the defense of a position against an attack". It should not be confused with the modern word "apology" which, though it derives from the same source, has a different definition. Those who engage in this practice are known as apologists or apologetes.

This wiki focuses primarily on Christian apologetics and apologists.

Christian apologetics

Christian apologetics can be divided into three categories:

Thomistic/classical
This method of apologetics relies on philosophical arguments to support the existence of a god and builds upon those foundational arguments with additional arguments designed to support specific Christian claims. An example of Thomistic apologetics is the natural-law argument.
Evidentialist
This method relies on empirical evidence (historical evidence as well as archeology, cosmology, biology and other sciences) to build arguments which attempt to justify belief in God, miracles and other supernatural claims of Christian theology. A good example of evidentalist apologetics is the myriad arguments for a young earth or universe.
Presuppositional
This method asserts that belief in god and the truth of revealed scripture (The Bible) are foundational assumptions. Beginning with those assumptions, the presupposionalist attempts to rationally justify Christianity, defend Christianity from attack, and attack perceived flaws in other worldviews. An example of presuppositional apologetics is the avoidance of hell argument.

Counter-apologetics

See also: Counter-apologetics

Each type of apologetics has a distinct method of being defeated.

Thomistic/classical
Since Thomistic/Classical apologetics are based on a philosophical base a strong knowledge of the philosophical thinking related to the different arguments in this category is needed.
Evidentalist
This method requires a knowledge of the science, history, and evidence behind the premises of the argument being used. See Atheist Universe.
Presuppositional
Presuppositional apologetics are the easiest to defeat. All are based on one or several unproven assumptions and until these assumptions are proven the skeptic is allowed to ignore the rest of the argument.
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
wiki navigation
IronChariots.Org
Toolbox