Transcript No-excuse intuitionism - Reasonable Faith Adelaide

NO-EXCUSE INTUITIONISM
A fresh approach to apologetics
INTRODUCTION: HOW I WAS CONVERTED
Love, care and the gospel brought me to Christ
WHAT IS THE QUESTION OF APOLOGETIC METHOD?
Bertrand Russell’s China Teapot quote
CATEGORIZATIONS OF APOLOGETIC METHODS
1. Categorized by the method of argumentation
Classical, Evidential, Presuppositionalism, Reformed Epistemology,
No apologetics. See Cowan ‘Five Views on Apologetics’
CATEGORIZATIONS OF APOLOGETIC METHODS
2. Categorized by the mode of knowing: Faith and Reason
Natural theology, Faith seeking understanding, Incompatibility of
faith and reason. See the introduction to Paul Helm, ‘Faith and
Reason’
CATEGORIZATIONS OF APOLOGETIC METHODS
3. Categorized by the mode of knowing: Evidentialism or
Presuppositionalism
A continuum between the two?
NO-EXCUSE INTUITIONISM OUTLINED: WHICH
TRUTHS SHOULD BE PRESUPPOSED?
The truths which should be presupposed are those moral truths
which we need to know in order to live a blameless life.
The truths which should be argued for are the other truths of the
Bible, inasmuch as they can be argued for.
NO-EXCUSE INTUITIONISM OUTLINED: WHAT IS IT TO
PRESUPPOSE?
If a truth should be presupposed, we should not argue for it in such
a way that we expect someone who is persuaded by our
arguments to be persuaded with that argument as the ground of
their new belief
NO-EXCUSE INTUITIONISM OUTLINED: WHAT IS IT TO
PRESUPPOSE?
If a truth should be presupposed, it is still right to argue for the
consistency of that truth with the world we live in. Such an
argument could be described as ‘faith seeking understanding’ or
‘negative apologetics’.
NO-EXCUSE INTUITIONISM OUTLINED: WHAT TRUTHS
SHOULD BE ARGUED FOR?
All other truths of the Bible, especially those central to the gospel
NO-EXCUSE INTUITIONISM DEFENDED: NO-EXCUSE
INTUITIONISM DERIVES FROM THE CONCEPT OF
NO-EXCUSE
We are without excuse for our moral failings. This implies all people
ought to know the moral truths they need to know to avoid moral
failings. This implies that each such moral truth is able to be known
in simple fashion. This implies that each such moral truth is
knowable through intuitions. Hence no-excuse intuitionism.
NO-EXCUSE INTUITIONISM DEFENDED: ROMANS 1
SAYS WE ARE WITHOUT EXCUSE FOR OUR MORAL
FAILURES
Romans 1:18, 21, 23, 24, 26, 28
NO-EXCUSE INTUITIONISM DEFENDED: ROMANS 1
IMPLIES A GENERIC ETHICAL INTUITIONISM
Robert Audi (‘The Good in the Right’) defines ‘Intuitionism as an
ethical theory to be, in outline and in a minimal version, the view
that there is at least one moral principle that is non-inferentially and
intuitively knowable’. He defines ‘generic intuitionism’ as the
‘stronger view, on which there is a group of at least several such
moral principles’.
NO-EXCUSE INTUITIONISM DEFENDED: WHEN THESE
MORAL TRUTHS ARE ARGUED FOR, THE DOCTRINE
OF NO-EXCUSE IS UNDERMINED
If the apologist’s argument is successful, the person’s newfound
moral belief will rest on that argument. But in that case it will be
logical for the person to say that others have an excuse for not
believing that moral truth – the excuse that they never heard the
argument which persuaded them of that moral truth.
NO-EXCUSE INTUITIONISM DEFENDED: WHEN THESE
MORAL LAWS ARE ARGUED FOR, ETHICAL
CONSEQUENTIALISM IS IMPLIED
But the ends does not justify the means
NO-EXCUSE INTUITIONISM DEFENDED: EVIDENCE
FOR GOSPEL CLAIMS SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO
UNBELIEVERS
The noble Bereans of Acts 17:11-12 were right not to immediately
believe the historical elements of Paul’s claims, but to test them.
NO-EXCUSE INTUITIONISM DEFENDED: EVIDENCE
FOR GOSPEL CLAIMS SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO
UNBELIEVERS
The noble Bereans of Acts 17:11-12 were right not to immediately
believe the historical elements of Paul’s claims, but to test them.
Unbelievers ought to consider the evidence for the gospel’s claims
before believing it.
CRITIQUE OF APOLOGETIC CATEGORIZATIONS
ACCORDING TO METHOD OF KNOWING
Method of argumentation is the best way of categorizing
apologetic methods, as the truth no-excuse intuitionism implies