Classical apologetics reasons from general revelation to the existence of God. It seeks to prove the existence of God through empirical reflection (what we discern through our senses)  and observation. It involves a two-step approach: 1) Appealing to nature & reason, and 2) Moving into defending special revelation.

God gives evidence of His existence to everyone (Ps 19:1; Acts 14:17; Rom 1:18-20). Calvin used the phrase sensus divinitatis to argue that everyone inherently has a “sense of the divine.” The problem is that many people willfully suppress their knowledge of God that was imparted to them (Rom 1:18). Paul emphasizes that God made His invisible attributes (His eternal power and divine nature) clearly evident to everyone (Romans 1:19-20). Yet many people choose to ignore or dismiss this evidence, thereby suppressing the truth.

Classical apologetics can unmask this willful suppression of truth by unbelievers.

There are limits to our the use of reason in classical apologetics. Reason does not get us all the way to truth that is necessary for salvation—i.e., the gospel; only special revelation can do that. But natural reason can move one towards the truth of special revelation. Reason in classical apologetics can be a powerful springboard into the gospel.

Cosmological arguments are often used in classical apologetics. Paul asserts in Romans 1: 19-20 that we can know something about God through His creation. This has fostered various arguments for His existence. Among them are the cosmological argument which reasons to believe that the cosmos depends on something outside itself. While there are multiple variations on the cosmological argument, they all argue from the fact of the universe to the cause of the universe.

The force of cosmological reasoning maintains that nothing apart from the existence and activity of a transcendent first cause (immaterial, simple, eternal, etc.) can possibly explain the existence of things within the Universe. A thousand years ago, the medieval philosopher Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225–1274) offers four variations of the cosmological argument. Two centuries before that, Anselm of Canterbury offered his famous (and controversial) “ontological” argument that is also classified as a variant cosmological argument. (I will be discussing the ontological argument in a future blog.)

The Kalam Cosmological argument is probably the best known cosmological argument today. It has been championed by William Lane Craig. This argument was first proposed by Muslim Persian thinker Al-Ghazali in 12th century. Some Christians have a problem with accepting a Muslim argument. However, all truth is God’s truth no matter who articulates it . . . as I will cover in a future blog.

Here is the Kalam Cosmogical Argument that is offered by William Lane Craig:

1) Whatever begins to exist has a cause.

2) The universe began to exist

3) Therefore, the universe has a cause. (This is what is known as a “deductive” argument in logic. I will cover logical arguments in a future blog.) 

From this Craig then argues the conclusion.

4) The cause of the universe is God (must therefore be uncaused, all-powerful, eternal, and immaterial.

That universe exists as a space-mass-time continuum, with each of the three entities essentially indistinguishable from, and coterminous with the other two . . , is regarded by some as possible evidence of the one trinitarian God. In addition to the cosmological argument, there are other powerful arguments classified under classical apologetics. They include the Fine Tuning Argument (the universe is finely tuned to support life with numerous cosmological constants balanced on a razor’s edge), Teleological Argument (argument from design). Those arguments will be covered in future blogs.