Here’s a link to a really good teaching by Phil Johnson concerning apologetics in which he summarizes both evidential and presuppositional approaches.
http://thegracelifepulpit.com/Sermons.aspx?code=2016-06-05-PJ
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
The Battle Cry 
Fascinating, I’ve just downloaded it. Curious he’s still presuppositional right?
LikeLike
Yes he is!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I listened to the entire presentation given here by Mr. Johnson.
There is a long route that one can take and look at the main scriptures here, or there is the short route as I have taken here.
Either way one winds up at this point: there are mysteries of God that we cannot understand except by faith apart from “proof” as defined by most dictionaries.
The first thing that Mr. Johnson quotes is Psalm 14:1.
“The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.'”
He then asks the question: “But what if such a fool demands proof?”
I don’t understand why Mr. Johnson spends almost the next hour trying to answer the fool’s question. If his intent is to educate us about the many positions that people take, particularly classic, philosophic, rational, logical, or moral arguments for or against a God; then he has done a generally good job.
If his attempt is to logically prove God to the fool, I think he has wasted his time.
My experience is that people like the fool of Psalm 14:1 will never rarely for “proof” and if one presents what they think is proof, the fool will not listen anyway.
When those like the fool in Psalm 14:1 has a conversation with a Christian, if the fool is educated, this discussion usually ends up in discussion about mysteries and not things that can logically be proven.
In short, I like the word “evidence” better than “proof” when a discussion like this is made.
One winds up with problems right off of the bat with the word “proof” as it is defined in the dictionary when a presentation like this is made.
A Christian has to believe in mysteries of God that can’t be explained except by faith. One example would be the Triune God. We will never be able to prove this to anyone this side of heaven and possibly even when we are there.
I like logic myself but, like man, it has its limitations.
LikeLike
Phia Johnson is a presuppositionalist, as am I. His goal was to present the various rational arguments and then let the Bible speak. The Bible tells us that we all know God exists. So when an atheist asks me how I know God exists, I can readily reply “The same way you do!” 🙂 His summary of classical evidentialism was I thought well done. One presuppositionalist (Sye Ten Bruggencate) calls using the evidential approach ‘putting God on trial’ with the atheist as judge!
Regardless of what approach one takes there needs to have been a divine opening of the dead human heart and the blind mind opened before an unbeliever will believe.
LikeLike
Hi Dan,
“Regardless of what approach one takes there needs to have been a divine opening of the dead human heart and the blind mind opened before an unbeliever will believe.
I agree with this, Dan. 🙂
I have two questions for you on this:
1) What are Phil Johnson’s INTENT in this message?
I have given two possibilities which I will repeat with one grammatical change:
“The first thing that Mr. Johnson quotes is Psalm 14:1.
“The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.’
“He then asks the question: ‘But what if such a fool demands proof?’
“I don’t understand why Mr. Johnson spends almost the next hour trying to answer the fool’s question. If his intent is to educate us about the many positions that people take, particularly classic, philosophic, rational, logical, or moral arguments for or against a God; then he has done a generally good job.
“If his attempt is to logically prove God to the fool, I think he has wasted his time. My experience is that people like the fool of Psalm 14:1 will rarely ask for ‘proof’ and if one presents what they think is proof, the fool will not listen anyway.”
It there is a 3rd possibility, please share it with me.
2) You made this statement:
“The Bible tells us that we all know God exists. So when an atheist asks me how I know God exists, I can readily reply ‘The same way you do!’” 🙂
Have you had success with this quote as an evangelistic tool?
LikeLike
I don’t think Phil Johnson was trying to ‘prove’ God to the foolish person because he knows we can’t prove God to anyone without intervention. And no, I can’t recall a particular time I saw an atheist respond in a positive manner to presuppositional apologetics, but that doesn’t mean there was no impact. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
So, from what you have answered, Dan, it seems that Phil is using this presentation to teach Christians something.
Your answer about the possibility that there can eventually be an impact seems to go against
“The fool has said in his heart, There is no God.”
Can you see where my logic has taken me? 🙂
LikeLike
I think he makes a strong case that neither approach to apologetics (evidential or presuppositional) will make a dent into a hard heart until God opens the heart.
LikeLiked by 1 person
God’s opening of a heart is a mystery. There is no logical reason why He should choose to or not to do it. Such mysteries cannot be logically explained.
LikeLike
It’s a supernatural act of God. What might be a bigger question is why he would open any heart to hear the gospel, repent and believe. I believe the answer lies in the doctrines of sovereign grace that tells us the from the beginning God had a remnant people in mind, for his honor and glory, and he brought it to pass. I believe the remnant to be the same ones the angel referred to as ‘his people’ talking to Joseph about whom Jesus would save. There is much more scripture, both OT and NT concerning God’s remnant. I would say that the ‘doctrine of the remnant’ runs from Genesis to Revelation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I almost put the question just like that, myself, Dan! 🙂
LikeLike
Pingback: Late June 2016 Presuppositional #Apologetics’ Links | The Domain for Truth