In order for the apologetic approach to be faithful to the teachings of
the Christian worldview, it must by necessity, be grounded in the ontological
Trinity it seeks to defend. Because this doctrine stands at the very epicenter
of Christian theology, and is at bottom, paradoxical in nature, it follows that
a biblically faithful approach to apologetics will necessarily involve paradox
from start to finish. Because this is unavoidably the substance of the
circumstance, Christian apologetics must employ a uniquely Christian
understanding and consumption of logic if it is to achieve it’s objective of
defending the truth of God for the glory of God.
INTRODUCTION
Christian
apologetics seeks to vindicate the philosophy and theology of the Christian
worldview. Now, you may read that sentence and think nothing could be more
obvious than that. And perhaps there is something to be said about the direct
and simple structure of the statement. But there is far more in that sentence
than meets the eye.
The most basic
question emerging from my first statement is “What is the Christian worldview?”
If one were to look to any culture for the answer to that question, they will
surely come up with as many different answers as there are groups in the
culture. Moreover, every culture would, without doubt, provide significantly
different answers to this one question. Additionally, if you were to search for
answers across Christian denominations, I am afraid you would fare no better.
It is a sad fact that not only would you not you gain agreement among
“Christian” denominations, you would very likely not even find agreement within
individual denominations. This points us to no small dilemma.
If Christian
apologetics seeks to vindicate the Christian worldview, and we cannot agree on
what the Christian worldview actually is, then how on earth could we ever agree
on a methodology for it’s vindication? What exactly would we be vindicating? No
one can agree. This current state of affairs points to the scandal and plight
of the project of apologetics in modern culture. Moreover, this state of
affairs also explains why the project of apologetics seems to not only fail to
accomplish its goal; it also explains why the field is so incredibly confused.
The basic problem
with apologetic method is located in our understanding of the basic tenets of
Christianity. And nothing is more basic to Christianity that it’s understanding
of God. Cornelius Van Til says, “We must first ask what kind of God
Christianity believes in before we can really ask with intelligence whether
such a God exists. The what precedes the that; the connotation precedes the
denotation; at least the latter cannot be discussed intelligently without at
once considering the former.”[1]
The implications
for apologetic methodology are sweeping if one accepts that the relationship
between Christian theology and Christian apologetics is inextricable. Hence,
the Christian doctrines of God, man, sin, nature, redemption and so forth will
all serve to inform apologetic content and shape apologetic structure as well
as define the apologetic approach. Christian apologetics then, begins with the
nature of Christian doctrine which itself can only begin with the doctrine of
the self-contained ontological Trinity in Scripture. “Christian thinkers
throughout the ages have felt the burden to guard and develop what often seem
to be three competing ideals – the systematic harmony of Christian doctrine
(Lu. 24:44), the novelty of certain paradoxical doctrines (John 6:52-60), and
the possibility of a robust Christian apologetic (Acts 17:31).[2]
Unfortunately, what we witness in the modern apologetic landscape is an
allegiance to Aristotelian logic to the neglect and at the expense of divine
truth. Essentially, unregenerate, finite human logic is uncritically established
as the sole authority and final court of appeal for what can and cannot be
accepted as justified true belief. It is the purpose of this paper to present
the presuppositional alternative in contrast with the popular traditional
method of Christian apologetics by demonstrating that unless we anchor the
vindication of the Christian worldview in the self-contained ontological Triune
God in Scripture, our method for vindicating Christian theism inevitably reduces
to subjectivism and ultimately skepticism. In this case, there can be no
rational presentation or intelligible vindication of any truth, let alone
Christian theism. The end result is a nightmare of nothingness, a chance world
of chaotic confusion, a reduction of rational thought to noetic nihilism.
EXEGETICAL WARRANT FOR PARADOX IN CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY (to be continued)
[1] Cornelius Van Til, The
Defense of the Faith (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Pub.
Co., 1985), 9.
[2] B.A. Bosserman, The Trinity and
the Vindication of Christian Paradox: an Interpretation and Refinement of the Theological
Apologetic of Cornelius van Til (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2014), xvii.
