Apologetics to the Glory of God
By John Frame
Presbyterian and Reformed. 247 pages. £.11.95
ISBN 978 087 5 522 432
This book is a primer in apologetics, from one of the United States's foremost disciples of Cornelius Van Til's presuppositionalist approach.
This is the view that a person's worldview can be reduced to certain assumptions (whether atheistic, polytheistic, rationalistic etc.) which affect their entire approach to opposing ways of life. By reducing the outlook of an opponent to their particular suppositions, Frame aims to demonstrate that their system of thought is internally incoherent, or so unpalatable as to be unworkable. As such, it stands in a distinct tradition regarding what does and does not constitute a distinctively Christian apologetic.
The book is written in a user-friendly manner and covers some of the key areas in the discipline today, including such vexed issues as the problem of evil and atheism. Some readers this side of the Atlantic may find his chatty style a little off-putting, but if a reader can move beyond this, the book presents a clear and cogent evangelical approach.
Frame divides his subject into three broad criteria. These are apologetics as proof (for the existence of God); apologetics as defence (of the faith to unbelievers); and as offence (attacks upon alternative worldviews such as atheism and agnosticism). The first chapter is particularly worthwhile, as it sets out Frame's rationale for apologetics, which is then taken up in Chapters 3 to 8. Chapter 8 (the offence against atheism) is also very useful. But perhaps the best place to start for the uninitiated is Chapter 9, which sets out an idealised evangelistic dialogue between an unbeliever and a minister on an aeroplane(!).
The appendix on Frame's response to the classical apologetic is very revealing for those familiar with these respective positions on the evangelical spectrum. The present reviewer would probably be grouped with these classical apologists that Frame critiques and, as such, I offer a few comments:
Firstly, Frame (rightly) points out that no intellectual position is value free. Atheists as much as theists often assume at the outset of their arguments what they are ostensibly seeking to prove. But if Frame is to be consistent, then his approach leads to an impasse: the Christian and the atheist are left railing at each other from the fortresses of their own ideologies. Naturally, as Christians, we believe that Christianity is the only true option and that the atheist is fundamentally misled, but this is precisely what the apologist is seeking to address in order to convert the atheists. All the presuppositionalist can do is point out the assumptions of the atheist. He is still left in his own fortress.
Secondly, Frame appears to insist that all rational thought is essentially circular. But if this is the case, then the theist has no real point of contact with any position outside its own, since it is essentially tautologous. (He appears to be confusing deductive with inductive reasoning.) If this is followed through, the presuppositionalist appears to be demanding that an atheist lay down his assumptions on purely fideistic grounds (which, for the atheist, is precisely the point at issue). Thus he is begging the question.
Thirdly, the Kantian origins of presuppositionalism are not developed to tackle the questions raised by Wittgensteinian thinking. Thus, Frame's polemic looks rather dated.
To conclude: this is a stimulating read, especially good for the general reader. Frame presents an honest, biblical (if at times superficial) treatment of the subject. Recommended and readable.
