top of page
Search

How Does Classical Apologetics Defend Christianity Using Reason and Evidence?

Introduction: The Foundations of Classical Apologetics


Classical apologetics, as its name suggests, is rooted in the long-standing tradition of rationally defending the Christian faith. This method has been practiced by early Christian thinkers such as Augustine, Anselm, and Thomas Aquinas, and its core principles are built on reasoned arguments for the existence of God and the reliability of Christian claims. The method contrasts with other apologetic approaches, such as presuppositionalism and evidentialism, by emphasizing logical proofs for God’s existence before moving on to the specifics of Christian doctrine. Classical apologetics takes a step-by-step approach, first arguing for theism and then using historical evidence to defend Christianity.


Modern classical apologists, such as William Paley, C. S. Lewis, and Norman Geisler, have continued this tradition, focusing on rational arguments and the historical evidence surrounding the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This method can be summarized in two main steps: first, establishing theistic arguments (often through philosophical reasoning), and second, defending Christian doctrine using historical evidence.



Establishing Theistic Proofs: The Rational Foundation of Belief in God


The initial step in classical apologetics is to establish that the existence of God is a rational belief. Classical apologists argue that before one can consider the specific claims of Christianity, such as the resurrection of Jesus Christ or the divine inspiration of Scripture, it must first be established that God exists.


Classical apologists often appeal to various philosophical arguments to support the existence of God. Among the most widely accepted are the Cosmological Argument, the Teleological Argument, and the Moral Argument. Each of these has been developed to demonstrate that a belief in God is not only reasonable but necessary for explaining the universe, life, and morality.


The Cosmological Argument, which stems from the work of philosophers like Aristotle and Aquinas, posits that everything in the universe has a cause. This chain of causes must ultimately lead to a First Cause, which is uncaused and is identified as God. The Bible supports this view in passages such as Isaiah 40:26, where Jehovah is described as the one who calls the stars into existence: "Lift up your eyes on high, and see: who created these? He who brings out their host by number, calling them all by name." This verse, like many others in Scripture, points to God as the ultimate cause and creator of the universe.


The Teleological Argument, or the argument from design, claims that the universe displays evidence of purposeful design. This argument asserts that the intricate complexity of the universe cannot be the result of random chance. Classical apologists often cite Romans 1:20 to support this claim: "For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made." The verse clearly shows that the natural world reflects the order and intentional design of its Creator.


Finally, the Moral Argument suggests that objective moral values exist and can only be grounded in the existence of a moral lawgiver, God. Romans 2:15 speaks of the moral law that is written on the hearts of all people: "They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness." The existence of this moral law provides evidence that a moral God exists.


Classical apologists hold that these arguments, among others, provide a strong foundation for the belief in a theistic worldview. The belief in God is rational and necessary to explain the existence, order, and moral framework of the universe.



Historical Evidence: The Defense of Christian Doctrine


Once the existence of God has been established, the second step in classical apologetics is to defend the truth claims of Christianity using historical evidence. This step includes arguments for the deity of Christ, the reliability of the Bible, and the resurrection of Jesus Christ.


One central claim of Christianity is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Classical apologists often use historical evidence to defend the resurrection as a verifiable event. The New Testament, particularly the Gospels, provides eyewitness accounts of the resurrection, which have been scrutinized and found to be historically credible. Apologists frequently argue that the empty tomb, the post-resurrection appearances of Christ, and the transformation of the disciples are strong indicators of the historical truth of the resurrection.


In 1 Corinthians 15:3-8, Paul lists the witnesses of Christ’s resurrection, emphasizing that many of them were still alive at the time of his writing: "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep." Paul’s argument appeals to the historical reality of the resurrection as something that could be verified by speaking to the eyewitnesses.


Classical apologists also defend the divine inspiration of Scripture by pointing to fulfilled prophecy, miracles, and the unity of the Bible. They argue that the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies, such as those concerning the Messiah (Isaiah 53; Micah 5:2), demonstrate the supernatural origin of the Bible. Additionally, they cite the miraculous events recorded in the Bible, such as the resurrection of Jesus, as confirmation of the divine authority of Scripture.


John 10:37-38 highlights the role of miracles in confirming Jesus' divine mission: "If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father." Here, Jesus appeals to the evidence of his miraculous works as validation of his claims to be the Son of God.



Differences Between Classical Apologetics and Other Approaches


Classical apologetics differs significantly from other forms of apologetics, such as presuppositionalism and evidentialism, in its method of establishing the truth of Christianity. Presuppositionalism, for example, begins by assuming the truth of Christian theism and argues that all other worldviews are inconsistent. Presuppositionalists like Cornelius Van Til assert that everyone operates under a worldview, and the truth of Christianity is the only worldview that makes sense of reality. In contrast, classical apologists argue that theism must first be established by reason before specific Christian doctrines can be defended.


Evidentialism, on the other hand, places a greater emphasis on the direct use of evidence—such as historical or archaeological facts—without first establishing the existence of God. Evidentialists argue that the resurrection of Christ or the historical reliability of Scripture can be defended based on evidence alone. However, classical apologists believe that it is logically necessary to establish a theistic universe before such evidence can be meaningfully interpreted. As they often say, it makes no sense to speak of the resurrection as an act of God unless the existence of God has already been established.


In this sense, classical apologetics acts as a bridge between evidentialism and presuppositionalism. It shares the presuppositional belief that a worldview must be established to interpret facts, but it differs in its use of rational arguments to establish theism as a foundation for Christian doctrine.



Responding to Criticisms of Classical Apologetics


Classical apologetics has been criticized from several angles. Fideists and presuppositionalists argue that human reason is insufficient to prove the existence of God or defend Christianity. They reject the traditional theistic arguments employed by classical apologists and contend that faith alone is the basis for belief. Presuppositionalists, in particular, claim that any attempt to prove God’s existence outside of a presupposed Christian worldview is flawed.


One common objection raised by presuppositionalists is that all facts are interpreted through a worldview lens. According to this view, evidence for Christianity, such as the resurrection of Christ, can be interpreted differently depending on one’s worldview. For example, a pantheist might view the resurrection not as a divine miracle but as evidence of the oneness of all beings, while a naturalist might dismiss it as a myth. Presuppositionalists argue that no amount of evidence will persuade someone unless they already accept the Christian worldview.


Classical apologists respond to this criticism by acknowledging that worldview plays a role in how evidence is interpreted, but they argue that theism is a necessary foundation for making sense of historical facts. They contend that before one can assess evidence for the resurrection or the Bible’s reliability, the existence of God must be established through rational argument. Once this is done, the historical evidence can be seen as credible and convincing.



The Role of Miracles and Fulfilled Prophecy in Apologetics


Classical apologists often emphasize the importance of miracles and fulfilled prophecy in defending the Christian faith. These elements serve as supernatural confirmation of the truth of Christianity. Miracles, such as the resurrection of Jesus, are seen as acts of God that validate the claims of Christ and the apostles. Likewise, fulfilled prophecies, such as those concerning the coming of the Messiah, demonstrate the divine inspiration of Scripture.


For example, Isaiah 53 provides a detailed prophecy of the suffering and death of the Messiah, which is fulfilled in the New Testament accounts of Jesus’ crucifixion. This prophecy, written centuries before the events of the New Testament, is cited by classical apologists as evidence of the supernatural origin of the Bible.


Conclusion


As we have examined, classical apologetics offers a robust defense of the Christian faith by first establishing the existence of God through rational argumentation and then using historical evidence to defend the core claims of Christianity. This approach contrasts with both presuppositionalism and evidentialism, emphasizing the need for a theistic foundation before moving on to specific Christian doctrines. With its emphasis on reason, evidence, and historical reliability, classical apologetics provides a comprehensive method for defending the truth of Christianity in the face of skepticism and criticism.


About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220 books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).


RECOMMENDED READING


6 views0 comments

Comments

bottom of page