|
I am intentionally double posting, so my apologies if anyone finds this offensive but it seems best.
Ultimately I think that his argument is sound for his specific case. The issues hang on the use of classical apologetics, which to the unbeliever seems to do only 2 things:
1) Lay a foundation for knowledge upon regeneration.
2) Condemnation of the unregenerate.
Apologetics for the believer is a completely different situation as theism is axiomatic due to regeneration.
Man rejects the rationality of scripture and creation due to:
1) his fallen nature
2) his active rebellion.
Man cannot ascend to belief / faith due to the first and will not due to the second.
So at the current time I find it best to accede to his argument of the misapplication of apologetics as being able to allow man to rationally ascend to faith/belief.
The only way that he is going to be able to be reached fully is the same way that every man is reached fully, by regeneration by the Holy Spirit at which time his axiology will change.
__________________
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.
|