Quote:
Originally Posted by caleb_woodrow  Does he mean that a rational approach to *belief* is nonsensical because faith is non-rational? Thus, why do apologetics because people aren't saved by rational assent. This makes more sense.
Anyways, I would respond that
I. We are commanded to do apologetics
II. Proof (and hence apologetics) is not about persuasion.
III. There are many aspects of apologetics, and I think evangelism is one of them.
IV. With respect to III, we have no idea who the elect are, so we should use apologetics on any given person.
V. Apologetics is not just for non-Christians; it is for Christians as well. It can strengthen faith. | a better way of phrasing things would be it is irrational to approach some one who doesn't believe with rational reasons for belief if belief is not something which can be imparted by rational reasoning.
I agree with all your points Caleb with the addition that apologetics is also a condemnation of unbelief. The ultimate things in this instance seems to be that the non believer is unable to ascend rationally despite the evidence, be cause on one level he is unwilling and on another he is incapable.
__________________
Robert K. "Kelly" Brumbelow
Soon to be at Christ Covenant - Mansfield
University of Texas at Arlington - Pre-Professional Philosophy
Arlington, Texas
Dear Lord and Father of mankind, Forgive our foolish ways;
Reclothe us in our rightful mind, In purer lives Thy service find,
In deeper reverence, praise.
Last edited by Hungus; 02-23-2007 at 10:46 PM.
Reason: I should spell check before hitting submit
|