In this study three apologetic methodologies (evidentialism, Reformed epistemology, and
presuppositionalism) are analyzed to determine which method is most coherently related to
Reformed theology. It is argued that comparing how each methodology relates the doctrine
of Scripture with the doctrine of the resurrection can demonstrate which method is best
suited to defending Christianity in its Reformed interpretation. The doctrine of Scripture is
taken to be that of full plenary inspiration and inerrancy, and the question is which
apologetic method can be successful in defending that position.
After contemporary arguments for the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus Christ are
surveyed, each of the three respective apologetic methodologies is subjected to an
examination and critique. Each method is intra–systematically evaluated to determine
whether it suffers from internal contradictions or incoherencies. Each method is further
tested to determine whether, on its own internal principles, it is capable of a logical defense
of a high doctrinal view of Scripture. The respective methods are also compared and
contrasted with each other. A prominent issue is the direction of the methodology, i.e., its
sequence. Some strands of evidentialism attempt to move from the historical fact of the
resurrection to their doctrine of Scripture; Reformed epistemologists do not necessarily
require any historical argumentation at all; presuppositionalists take their doctrine of
Scripture and the resurrection as both necessary and mutually reinforcing points in their
worldview.
In the final analysis, it is the presuppositional methodology which emerges as that which is
most capable of coherently defending a doctrine of Scripture that includes full inspiration
and inerrancy. This is due to the transcendental nature of the argument that it presents. It
is urged in this study, however, that evidences, historical details, and logical analysis are all
critically important for a fully–orbed apologetic system. Presuppositionalism needs to be
ramified with evidential arguments, even if they are transposed into a transcendental key,
as supporting details in a transcendental framework. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Dogmatics))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:NWUBOLOKA1/oai:dspace.nwu.ac.za:10394/4465 |
| Date | January 2010 |
| Creators | West, Steven Donald |
| Publisher | North-West University |
| Source Sets | North-West University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
Page generated in 0.0127 seconds