Common Ground, Part 1

Much debate has taken place regarding which is the “right” apologetic method for Christians to adopt as they commend and defend their faith. On the surface, the pressing question seems to be, “How do we effectively win the unbelieving world to Christ?” But as we seek to answer this question, the presuppositional apologists will point out that this question may be a bit short-sighted. Perhaps the more complete question is “How do we effectively win the unbelieving world to Christ in a way that is obedient to Scripture?” In his book, Christian Apologetics, Cornelius Van Til clarifies the dilemma: “…This implies a refusal to grant that any area or aspect of reality… can be correctly interpreted except it be seen in the light of the main doctrines of Christianity” (124). On the surface, this seems to pose a problem to any apologist who seeks to argue the existence of the God of the Bible on the basis of scientific/historical evidence or logic/reason. Can an apologist faithfully commend and defend Christianity to an unbeliever while granting a level of common ground in the areas of evidence and reason, or is this a rebellious way of thinking which can only lead to atheistic conclusions?

To be continued...