David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Religious Studies 39 (3):299-321 (2003)
It is a widely held viewpoint in Christian apologetics that in addition to defending Christian theism against objections (negative apologetics), apologists should also present arguments in support of the truth of theism and Christianity (positive apologetics). In contemporary philosophy of religion, the Reformed epistemology movement has often been criticized on the grounds that it falls considerably short of satisfying the positive side of this two-tiered approach to Christian apologetics. Reformed epistemology is said to constitute or entail an inadequate apologetic methodology since it rejects positive apologetics or at least favours negative over positive apologetics. In this paper I argue that this common objection fails on two grounds. First, while the arguments of Reformed epistemology are relevant and useful to apologetics, neither Reformed epistemology nor its epistemological project should be identified with a distinct school or method of apologetics. Secondly, while certain claims of Reformed epistemology seem to imply a rejection of positive apologetics, or at least a preference for negative or positive apologetics, I argue that no such conclusion follows. In fact, although unimpressed by particular versions of natural theology and positive apologetics, Reformed epistemologists have provided criticisms of each that can constructively shape future approaches to the apologetic employment of natural theology and Christian evidences.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Ankur Barua (2013). The Problem of Criteria and the Necessity of Natural Theology. Heythrop Journal 54 (2):166-180.
Similar books and articles
Deane-Peter Baker (2005). Plantinga's Reformed Epistemology: What's the Question? [REVIEW] International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 57 (2):77-103.
Corey Miller (2009). A Critique of Marx's Epistemology of Religion From Reformed Epistemology. International Philosophical Quarterly 49 (3):351-359.
Donald Hatcher (1986). Plantinga and Reformed Epistemology. Philosophy and Theology 1 (1):84-95.
John Beversluis (1995). Reforming the “Reformed” Objection to Natural Theology. Faith and Philosophy 12 (2):189-206.
Mark S. McLeod (1993). Rationality and Theistic Belief: An Essay on Reformed Epistemology. Cornell University Press.
Mark M. Hanna (1981). Crucial Questions in Apologetics. Baker Book House.
Michael Sudduth (2009). Revisiting the ‘Reformed Objection’ to Natural Theology. European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 2 (2):37-62.
Maurice Blondel (1964). The Letter on Apologetics, and, History and Dogma. W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co..
Maurice Blondel (1964). The Letter on Apologetics. New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Michael L. Czapkay Sudduth (1994). Bi-Level Evidentialism and Reformed Apologetics. Faith and Philosophy 11 (3):379-396.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads104 ( #37,529 of 1,902,204 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #280,998 of 1,902,204 )
How can I increase my downloads?