top of page
Search
Writer's pictureEdward D. Andrews
Sep 258 min read

Is There Common Ground in Christian Apologetics for Persuading Skeptics?

Exploring the Debate Between Classical and Presuppositional Apologetics


In Christian apologetics, one of the most significant debates involves the concept of "common ground" and whether there is a neutral point at which both Christian and non-Christian worldviews can meet for rational discourse. This debate is particularly pronounced between two primary schools of thought: classical apologetics and presuppositional apologetics.


Classical apologetics holds that there is indeed common ground that Christians can share with skeptics or non-believers. This common ground includes universal principles of logic, morality, and observable evidence. Classical apologists argue that through the use of reason and evidence, one can persuade skeptics of the truth of Christianity by appealing to shared, objective realities.


In contrast, presuppositional apologetics, particularly the branch known as revelational presuppositionalism, denies the existence of such common ground. Proponents argue that non-Christians operate from fundamentally different presuppositions that distort their view of evidence and reality. Therefore, without first accepting the authority of Scripture and the existence of God, no true common ground exists. According to presuppositionalists, the non-believer's worldview is inherently biased against God, making any so-called neutral discussion futile unless these presuppositions are addressed.



The Biblical Basis for Defending the Faith


The question of common ground in apologetics ultimately goes back to Scripture. The Bible itself provides guidance for how believers are to engage with those who oppose the Christian faith. In 1 Peter 3:15, Christians are called to “always be prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and respect.” This command implies that there is a way to rationally engage with non-believers. It suggests that Christians can give reasons for their faith that are accessible to skeptics, thus supporting the classical apologetic approach.


Additionally, the apostle Paul’s engagement with Greek philosophers at the Areopagus in Acts 17 provides an example of how a Christian can start with shared truths, such as the existence of a creator, and build a case for the gospel from there. Paul quotes their own poets and appeals to their reasoning, pointing out the inconsistency in their belief systems without assuming they already accepted the authority of Scripture. Acts 17:28 shows Paul saying, “For in him we live and move and have our being; as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are indeed his offspring.’” Paul’s method demonstrates the potential for a common intellectual ground.


At the same time, the Bible also makes clear that non-believers are spiritually blinded and resistant to the truth of God. Romans 1:18-23 explains that the ungodly “suppress the truth” and that although they know God’s invisible attributes through creation, they do not honor Him as God. This passage supports the presuppositional view that non-believers are not neutral but are actively suppressing the truth that they already know.



Common Ground in General Revelation and Natural Theology


One of the strongest arguments for common ground in classical apologetics is the concept of general revelation, or the idea that God has revealed Himself to all people through the created order. Psalm 19:1-4 declares, “The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. Day to day pours out speech, and night to night reveals knowledge. There is no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not heard.” This Psalm suggests that creation itself testifies to the reality of God, providing evidence that all people can observe.


Romans 1:20 reinforces this, stating, “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. So they are without excuse.” According to these verses, everyone has access to knowledge of God’s existence through nature, which provides a common basis for dialogue between believers and non-believers.


Natural theology, the practice of reasoning about God based on observation of the natural world, also supports the notion of common ground. Classical arguments such as the cosmological argument, teleological argument, and moral argument all start from observations that believers and non-believers alike can acknowledge. The cosmological argument, for instance, argues that the existence of the universe requires a cause outside of itself, leading to the conclusion of a necessary, eternal Creator. This reasoning does not rely on the authority of Scripture but rather on logical deduction, thus forming a potential bridge between the Christian and non-Christian.



The Presuppositional Challenge: The Noetic Effects of Sin


While classical apologists see common ground in general revelation and natural theology, presuppositionalists point to the noetic effects of sin—the idea that sin has affected the human mind and its ability to reason correctly. According to this view, although all people have knowledge of God through creation, their reasoning faculties are so damaged by sin that they will interpret evidence in a way that supports their rebellion against God.


This concept is drawn from passages like Ephesians 4:17-18, which describes the unbelieving Gentiles as having “futility of their minds” and being “darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart.” Presuppositionalists argue that because of this spiritual blindness, non-believers are incapable of interpreting evidence correctly without first having their presuppositions changed by God’s regenerating grace.


1 Corinthians 2:14 states, “The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.” Presuppositionalists interpret this verse as evidence that rational argumentation alone cannot bring someone to faith in Christ. Unless the Holy Spirit changes their heart, they will continue to reject the truth, no matter how compelling the evidence.


Thus, from the presuppositional perspective, the notion of common ground is an illusion. Without the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit, the non-believer will interpret any evidence in a way that conforms to their existing worldview, which is fundamentally opposed to God.



The Role of Scripture in Establishing Truth


A key difference between classical and presuppositional apologetics is their view on the role of Scripture in establishing truth. Classical apologists tend to use evidence and reason to demonstrate the truth of Christianity, with the goal of leading the skeptic to a point where they are willing to consider the claims of Scripture. In this view, Scripture is authoritative, but the non-believer must first be convinced of its reliability through rational argument and historical evidence.


In contrast, presuppositionalists argue that Scripture must be the starting point for all knowledge, not something that is proven by external evidence. They hold to the doctrine of sola Scriptura, meaning that Scripture is the highest authority for all truth claims. As 2 Timothy 3:16-17 declares, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” From this perspective, any attempt to reason apart from the presupposition of God’s Word is inherently flawed.


Revelational presuppositionalists believe that all reasoning and evidence must be interpreted through the lens of Scripture. They argue that even non-believers are dependent on the truth of Scripture, whether they recognize it or not, because without the Christian worldview, concepts such as logic, morality, and the uniformity of nature would have no foundation. As Proverbs 1:7 states, “The fear of Jehovah is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction.” Therefore, presuppositionalists reject the idea of neutral evidence or common ground and instead call the skeptic to repent and submit to the authority of God’s Word.



The Limits of Rational Persuasion


Both classical and presuppositional apologetics recognize that rational persuasion has its limits. While classical apologists emphasize reason and evidence, they also acknowledge that these tools alone cannot bring someone to saving faith in Christ. As 1 Corinthians 1:18 states, “For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” The gospel message is inherently offensive to human pride, and many will reject it despite the evidence.


Presuppositionalists go a step further by arguing that rational argumentation is only effective when it is used in conjunction with a call to repentance and submission to God’s authority. They emphasize that the problem with non-believers is not merely intellectual but moral. As Romans 1:21-23 explains, “For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.” According to this view, non-believers reject God not because of a lack of evidence but because of their sinful rebellion.


Ultimately, both approaches recognize the necessity of the Holy Spirit’s work in bringing a person to faith. Jesus Himself acknowledged the need for divine intervention when He said in John 6:44, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.” Classical apologists may focus more on presenting evidence and reasoning, but they too depend on the Holy Spirit to change hearts. Presuppositionalists emphasize the necessity of starting with God’s Word, but they also acknowledge that only God can regenerate a sinner’s heart.



Can Christians Find Common Ground with Skeptics?


In light of the biblical evidence, it is clear that while there is some common ground in terms of general revelation and the use of reason, the deepest level of persuasion requires addressing the underlying spiritual condition of the non-believer. Classical apologetics offers a way to engage skeptics on their own terms by appealing to shared principles of reason, logic, and observable evidence. However, presuppositional apologetics rightly emphasizes the need to challenge the presuppositions of the non-believer and call them to repentance and faith in Christ.


The Bible supports both approaches in different ways. Scripture encourages believers to reason with others and to give a defense for their faith, as seen in Paul’s example in Acts 17 and in the command of 1 Peter 3:15. At the same time, the Bible acknowledges the spiritual blindness of those who reject God, as seen in Romans 1 and 1 Corinthians 2, and emphasizes the role of the Holy Spirit in bringing people to faith.


Ultimately, the question of common ground in apologetics is not a matter of choosing one method over the other but of recognizing the complementary nature of both approaches. While classical apologetics can effectively use reason and evidence to challenge skeptics, presuppositional apologetics reminds us that true conversion requires more than intellectual assent—it requires the transforming work of the Holy Spirit.



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


15 views0 comments

Comments

bottom of page