Brief prolegomenon to Christian apologetics

Many well-intentioned people who take an interest in apologetics (especially early on in their journeys) have an unbiblical idea of the apologetic task. If you Google "apologetics", you'll be immediately bombarded with content from apologists who do not hold a Reformed view of man, God and salvation. That view leads them to offer unbelievers an apologetic in which believer and unbeliever start off on equal footing, with Christianity presented as the best option among the many rational options available.

A great many books have been written on a prolegomenon (introduction) to apologetics, and in them it is routinely taken for granted that Scripture's teaching on the nature of unbelief is simply irrelevant, or perhaps even wrong. As Reformed apologists, we should build an apologetic methodology that is submissive to and informed by Scripture, and not build on principles that undermine the teaching of Scripture. This point comes across clearly in the introduction of the new book by Daniël Akande.

For a long time, the tacit assumption that the unbeliever is somehow within his intellectual rights to object to or outrightly reject the truth of Christianity has been made. The unbeliever is perceived as the “rational” one, while the believer is said to believe solely due to his upbringing or due to blind faith.

This perception has been altered somewhat due to the efforts of some great Christian minds over the years who have tried their best to build an intellectual case for the Christian faith and to answer the challenge of unbelief. But in many cases, even these great minds have made a concession to the unbeliever: the concession that he has some sort of intellectual or rational foundation upon which he can reasonably object to the claims of the Christian faith.

All too often, it is assumed that the unbeliever has made a coherent and rational case for his unbelief. It is assumed that the unbeliever has arrived at his unbelief through genuine intellectual considerations. It is assumed that the Christian and unbelieving positions are on somewhat equal intellectual footing and that the Christian’s job is to show the unbeliever that the Christian position is equally reasonable or perhaps more reasonable than the unbelieving position. The Christian position is presented as being the best option amongst multiple reasonable views.

These assumptions must be rejected. They must be rejected because Scripture teaches us that Christ is the way, truth, and life and that all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden in Him. Scripture teaches us that those who reject Christ are foolish. Christ only is the Solid Rock and all other ground is sinking sand. Christianity, then, is not just the most reasonable position out of many—it is the only rationally defensible position.