What do you think?
Rate this book
¡Preparate para la buena batalla!: La metodología apologética de Greg L. Bahnsen
El Dr. Greg L. Bahnsen creía que para hacer frente a los académicos de la época y a sus argumentos contra la fe cristiana, era necesario darles la batalla en los niveles más altos de la erudición utilizando sus herramientas intelectuales contra ellos. Podía analizar rápidamente y dar respuestas directas y convincentes a todas sus objeciones. Antes de su prematura muerte en 1995, el Dr. Bahnsen pronunció una serie de conferencias sobre apologética en la Conferencia de Preparación para la Vida de American Vision. Estas conferencias son raras, ya que son algunas de las únicas presentaciones en vídeo de las enseñanzas del Dr. Bahnsen. Las sesiones de una semana de duración, presentadas ante estudiantes de secundaria y universitarios, exponen los fundamentos de la visión cristiana del mundo y el enfoque bíblico para defender la fe. Estas lecciones han sido destiladas y convertidas en un manual único sobre apologética.
294 pages, ebook
First published March 1, 2007
9 people are currently reading
259 people want to read
About the author
Greg L. Bahnsen
77 books145 followersGreg L. Bahnsen was an influential Calvinist Christian philosopher, apologist, and debater. He was an ordained minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and a full time Scholar in Residence for the Southern California Center for Christian Studies.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
February 5, 2023
This book provides a broad, consistent application of presuppositional apologetics that is unyielding and rooted. There is a kind of single minded simplicity that is appealing in the method, even as it expands to apply to so many areas of life. It is a solid book that I would recommend to many, especially as a starting point into presuppositional apologetics.
November 29, 2013
I read this one back when it was first released about 5-6 years ago. I have to admit that i was underwhelmed. The general contours and themes of presuppositionalism are all there, and the quotations and examples are helpful for apologetic reference. For this the book should be commended. One of the main problems I had with the book (at least when it was first released) was that it was promoted as if it were written by Bahnsen himself. I’m not quite sure it’s honest to say that DeMar only wrote the foreword when it seems that he (or someone else) wrote the entire book. It doesn’t read like Bahnsen, and lacks the kind of rigor you’d expect from Bahnsen. Lastly, several claims made in the book are 'supported' by references to Wikipedia. This is simply back academic etiquette.
January 2, 2011
I have to admit I was a bit disappointed with this book. I thought it was a book written by Bahnsen, but it turns out that it is a book edited by Gary Demar that is a commentary on Bahnsen's apologetics. In that vein, it is much like what Bahnsen did for Van Til in his book, Van Til's Apologetic. But Bahnsen's work on Van Til is better than Demar's work on Bahnsen. However, I think this book would be an excellent choice for the high schooler as a brief and easy-to-read introduction to presuppositional apologetics.
August 2, 2017
I've been looking for a good, non-academic introduction to presuppositional apologetics for a while. I was introduced to presuppositionalism through C. Gregg Singer's outstanding book "From Rationalism to Irrationality", though I didn't really understand the implications of the philosophy until reading Bahnsen's "Van Til's Apologetic." From there, I read Frame's "Van Til's Apologetic."
By the time I read those works I understood presuppositionalism very well, but I still wanted to find something less academic, less rigorous that I could tell others about and have them read. I was excited to see Scott Olihpint's recent work, "Covenantal Apologetics" and read it. While it was a fine work, it wasn't the book I was looking for. I decided to pick up "Pushing the Antithesis", thinking that perhaps this might be the answer. Much to my delight, I found that this is indeed the best introduction to presuppositional apologetics that I've encountered.
The book, though advertised as being written by Bahnsen, is misleading. The book is really written by Gary DeMar, who used lecture notes from a conference lectures series by Bahnsen. DeMar is not very clear about this, though it is easy enough to discover while reading, that DeMar did not rely only upon Bahnsen's lectures to write this work. That being said, DeMar knows presuppositionalism and does an outstanding job articulating it.
The greatest strength I found in the book is in the strong Scriptural foundation of the method that is used throughout the work. This is critical in articulating the apologetic, as it can too easily be viewed as a philosophical system, rather than a Scriptural one.
Early on, they establish the principle that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge." This principle helps establish the idea that there is no neutrality--man is a sinner and is thus not neutral. This is the "noetic" effect of sin--its impact upon the mind. "Attempting neutrality toward God undermines your quest for knowledge." p. 31
They also establish God's aseity through his name, "I am Who I am." "The name speaks of God’s self-existence: God is. He did not come to be. He does not say “I was.” He is. He exists of Himself without prior cause or present dependence: He always is. We might understand it as signifying: “I am simply because I am,” or “I am being that I am being.” 2. The name speaks of God’s unlimited duration: He is the eternal “I Am.”" p.69
"The Christian worldview is established on a sure and unchallengeable foundation. It is established on the eternal God of Scripture." p. 69
They also establish that God is the sole ground for knowledge. They write, "The Christian system has a self-attesting authority. Your epistemology is grounded in the all-interpreting presupposition of the personal, infinite, eternal, self-contained, self-revealing Creator of all facts and laws. By the very nature of the case, God is your ultimate reference point, and He alone is self-validating. How could the absolute, all-creating God of Scripture appeal to some authority greater than His own? Remember that Scripture recognizes this phenomenon when it declares in Hebrews: “For when God made the promise to Abraham, since He could swear by no one greater, He swore by Himself” (Heb. 6:13). By definition, God must be absolute authority. He needs no “counsel” to guide Him (Isa. 40:13; Rom. 11:34–35; 1 Cor. 2:16; cf. Job 35:11; 41:11). Indeed, Paul declares: “Let God be true, though every man be found a liar” (Rom. 3:4)" p. 122
This self-attestation is seen in the Gospels: "In Matthew 7:29 the people were amazed when Jesus taught “as one having authority, and not as their scribes.” The scribes appealed to renowned rabbis to validate their teaching: “You have heard that the ancients were told” (Matt. 5:21, 33). But Jesus’ authority was self-attesting. He declares that His word is like a rock which provides absolute stability for one’s life (Matt. 7:24–27). In fact, He teaches that His word will be the standard of judgment of all men at the Final Judgment (John 12:48). The believer’s authority, then, rests in the eternal foundation of God Almighty speaking in His objective self-revelation to man (the Bible). This provides a sure foundation to reason and experience."
The unbeliever, or even the confused Christian may say, "Presupposing God is begging the question," or they may say it is "circular reasoning." But the presuppositionalist will argue:
"All systems must ultimately involve some circularity in reasoning. For instance, when you argue for the legitimacy of the laws of logic, you must employ the laws of logic. How else can you justify laws of logic?"
But the presuppositionalist does not truly argue with circularity. "The “circularity” of a transcendental argument is not at all the same as the fallacious ‘circularity’ of an argument in which the conclusion is a restatement (in one form or another) of one of its premises. Rather, it is the circularity involved in a coherent theory (where all the parts are consistent with or assume each other) and which is required when one reasons about a precondition for reasoning, its “circles” are destructive of human thought—i.e., “vicious” and futile endeavors."
They even find the method itself in Scripture:
"Now then, what does Solomon mean in Proverbs 26? Why does he direct us on the one hand not to “answer a fool according to his folly” (v. 4), while on the other, he urges us to “answer a fool according to his folly” (v. 5)? This seems contradictory. But it is not; and it precisely outlines the Presuppositional Apologetic’s two-step procedure: Positively, you must present the truth and, negatively, you must warn of folly. Be aware: Though biblical apologetics involves these two steps, you do not have to use them in this order. The apologetic situation might require that the order be reversed. Nevertheless, both steps are necessary, even if not in any particular order."
The flow of the book is natural and it is well ordered. They begin by destroying the "Myth of Neutrality" and undermining the unbeliever's claims to the reasonable, rational position. They then define worldview, show them at work, and demonstrate four worldview types prevalent today.
They argue that apologetics is the battleground of worldviews. The believer knows because he knows God. "The unbelievers’ ‘epistemology is informed by their ethical hostility to God.'" p. 95 It is at this point that the evidentialist fails. They play "down the antithesis, and in the process ends up arguing only the probability of the existence of a god." p. 96 Christians know God is not probable--HE IS! We mustn't surrender the weapons of truth at the outset--we must utilize them! "It is your duty as a Christian apologist to show the unbeliever that even in his denying God he is actually presupposing him." p. 105
As they write, "Epistemological method is not neutral." p. 116 and "epistemology necessarily presupposes metaphysic." p. 119 "The unbeliever who discounts metaphysics does so on the basis of his own hidden metaphysical program. He is operating on naturalistic, materialistic assumptions which he considers to be the final determiners of reality." p. 120
So it is clear that the unbeliever's mind is totally depraved--that it is tainted with the effects of sin and is not neutral. He is, as the Bible says, "a fool." This is not to say he is stupid. "For apologetic purposes a fool is one who does what “is right in his own eyes” (Prov. 12:15; Judges 17:6)" p. 141 It is a moral judgment, not an intellectual one.
They write, "your twin apologetic strategy boils down to this: You are challenging the unbeliever in one form or another to answer the question as to which worldview makes human experience intelligible. This is crucial for biblical apologetics. You are requiring the unbeliever to think about and declare the final reference point in his system which makes all facts and laws intelligible." p. 146
The Christian Gospel, and the Christian God are proven by "the impossibility of the contrary." p. 148 This mantra is repeated throughout the book.
The work then examines science and philosophy to further demonstrate the proof of God by showing how all other worldview options fail to make sense of the world. They do so by arguing that ethics only make sense when they are founded upon the eternal, unchanging character of God. They show how the uniformity of Nature, which all science assumes, can only be possible in a world created by God.
Then they show the problem of universals and the laws of logic for the unbeliever. "When unbelievers talk of concepts, they need a worldview to make them meaningful. But they do not have one. With all of their particulars, they can’t account for universals. As Dr. Van Til expressed it, they are “trying to put beads on a string with no holes in the beads.” They have no universals to hold things together." p. 205
It is important to note, as they do, that Christians ought not argue for the superiority of the Christian worldview, but the impossibility of the contrary. p. 216 Superiority infers other viable options, when there is only one viable option.
They conclude the book by arguing that only the Christian worldview can account for freedom and dignity.
Each chapter includes questions that may be used for further thought or even discussion by a group, or even school. Answers are given at the end.
This is the book I'll be giving to my children to read when they're older. But this is not a simplistic book, nor is it geared simply to the uninitiated. This is a thorough, foundational work on presuppositional apologetics and one I commend to everyone.
By the time I read those works I understood presuppositionalism very well, but I still wanted to find something less academic, less rigorous that I could tell others about and have them read. I was excited to see Scott Olihpint's recent work, "Covenantal Apologetics" and read it. While it was a fine work, it wasn't the book I was looking for. I decided to pick up "Pushing the Antithesis", thinking that perhaps this might be the answer. Much to my delight, I found that this is indeed the best introduction to presuppositional apologetics that I've encountered.
The book, though advertised as being written by Bahnsen, is misleading. The book is really written by Gary DeMar, who used lecture notes from a conference lectures series by Bahnsen. DeMar is not very clear about this, though it is easy enough to discover while reading, that DeMar did not rely only upon Bahnsen's lectures to write this work. That being said, DeMar knows presuppositionalism and does an outstanding job articulating it.
The greatest strength I found in the book is in the strong Scriptural foundation of the method that is used throughout the work. This is critical in articulating the apologetic, as it can too easily be viewed as a philosophical system, rather than a Scriptural one.
Early on, they establish the principle that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge." This principle helps establish the idea that there is no neutrality--man is a sinner and is thus not neutral. This is the "noetic" effect of sin--its impact upon the mind. "Attempting neutrality toward God undermines your quest for knowledge." p. 31
They also establish God's aseity through his name, "I am Who I am." "The name speaks of God’s self-existence: God is. He did not come to be. He does not say “I was.” He is. He exists of Himself without prior cause or present dependence: He always is. We might understand it as signifying: “I am simply because I am,” or “I am being that I am being.” 2. The name speaks of God’s unlimited duration: He is the eternal “I Am.”" p.69
"The Christian worldview is established on a sure and unchallengeable foundation. It is established on the eternal God of Scripture." p. 69
They also establish that God is the sole ground for knowledge. They write, "The Christian system has a self-attesting authority. Your epistemology is grounded in the all-interpreting presupposition of the personal, infinite, eternal, self-contained, self-revealing Creator of all facts and laws. By the very nature of the case, God is your ultimate reference point, and He alone is self-validating. How could the absolute, all-creating God of Scripture appeal to some authority greater than His own? Remember that Scripture recognizes this phenomenon when it declares in Hebrews: “For when God made the promise to Abraham, since He could swear by no one greater, He swore by Himself” (Heb. 6:13). By definition, God must be absolute authority. He needs no “counsel” to guide Him (Isa. 40:13; Rom. 11:34–35; 1 Cor. 2:16; cf. Job 35:11; 41:11). Indeed, Paul declares: “Let God be true, though every man be found a liar” (Rom. 3:4)" p. 122
This self-attestation is seen in the Gospels: "In Matthew 7:29 the people were amazed when Jesus taught “as one having authority, and not as their scribes.” The scribes appealed to renowned rabbis to validate their teaching: “You have heard that the ancients were told” (Matt. 5:21, 33). But Jesus’ authority was self-attesting. He declares that His word is like a rock which provides absolute stability for one’s life (Matt. 7:24–27). In fact, He teaches that His word will be the standard of judgment of all men at the Final Judgment (John 12:48). The believer’s authority, then, rests in the eternal foundation of God Almighty speaking in His objective self-revelation to man (the Bible). This provides a sure foundation to reason and experience."
The unbeliever, or even the confused Christian may say, "Presupposing God is begging the question," or they may say it is "circular reasoning." But the presuppositionalist will argue:
"All systems must ultimately involve some circularity in reasoning. For instance, when you argue for the legitimacy of the laws of logic, you must employ the laws of logic. How else can you justify laws of logic?"
But the presuppositionalist does not truly argue with circularity. "The “circularity” of a transcendental argument is not at all the same as the fallacious ‘circularity’ of an argument in which the conclusion is a restatement (in one form or another) of one of its premises. Rather, it is the circularity involved in a coherent theory (where all the parts are consistent with or assume each other) and which is required when one reasons about a precondition for reasoning, its “circles” are destructive of human thought—i.e., “vicious” and futile endeavors."
They even find the method itself in Scripture:
"Now then, what does Solomon mean in Proverbs 26? Why does he direct us on the one hand not to “answer a fool according to his folly” (v. 4), while on the other, he urges us to “answer a fool according to his folly” (v. 5)? This seems contradictory. But it is not; and it precisely outlines the Presuppositional Apologetic’s two-step procedure: Positively, you must present the truth and, negatively, you must warn of folly. Be aware: Though biblical apologetics involves these two steps, you do not have to use them in this order. The apologetic situation might require that the order be reversed. Nevertheless, both steps are necessary, even if not in any particular order."
The flow of the book is natural and it is well ordered. They begin by destroying the "Myth of Neutrality" and undermining the unbeliever's claims to the reasonable, rational position. They then define worldview, show them at work, and demonstrate four worldview types prevalent today.
They argue that apologetics is the battleground of worldviews. The believer knows because he knows God. "The unbelievers’ ‘epistemology is informed by their ethical hostility to God.'" p. 95 It is at this point that the evidentialist fails. They play "down the antithesis, and in the process ends up arguing only the probability of the existence of a god." p. 96 Christians know God is not probable--HE IS! We mustn't surrender the weapons of truth at the outset--we must utilize them! "It is your duty as a Christian apologist to show the unbeliever that even in his denying God he is actually presupposing him." p. 105
As they write, "Epistemological method is not neutral." p. 116 and "epistemology necessarily presupposes metaphysic." p. 119 "The unbeliever who discounts metaphysics does so on the basis of his own hidden metaphysical program. He is operating on naturalistic, materialistic assumptions which he considers to be the final determiners of reality." p. 120
So it is clear that the unbeliever's mind is totally depraved--that it is tainted with the effects of sin and is not neutral. He is, as the Bible says, "a fool." This is not to say he is stupid. "For apologetic purposes a fool is one who does what “is right in his own eyes” (Prov. 12:15; Judges 17:6)" p. 141 It is a moral judgment, not an intellectual one.
They write, "your twin apologetic strategy boils down to this: You are challenging the unbeliever in one form or another to answer the question as to which worldview makes human experience intelligible. This is crucial for biblical apologetics. You are requiring the unbeliever to think about and declare the final reference point in his system which makes all facts and laws intelligible." p. 146
The Christian Gospel, and the Christian God are proven by "the impossibility of the contrary." p. 148 This mantra is repeated throughout the book.
The work then examines science and philosophy to further demonstrate the proof of God by showing how all other worldview options fail to make sense of the world. They do so by arguing that ethics only make sense when they are founded upon the eternal, unchanging character of God. They show how the uniformity of Nature, which all science assumes, can only be possible in a world created by God.
Then they show the problem of universals and the laws of logic for the unbeliever. "When unbelievers talk of concepts, they need a worldview to make them meaningful. But they do not have one. With all of their particulars, they can’t account for universals. As Dr. Van Til expressed it, they are “trying to put beads on a string with no holes in the beads.” They have no universals to hold things together." p. 205
It is important to note, as they do, that Christians ought not argue for the superiority of the Christian worldview, but the impossibility of the contrary. p. 216 Superiority infers other viable options, when there is only one viable option.
They conclude the book by arguing that only the Christian worldview can account for freedom and dignity.
Each chapter includes questions that may be used for further thought or even discussion by a group, or even school. Answers are given at the end.
This is the book I'll be giving to my children to read when they're older. But this is not a simplistic book, nor is it geared simply to the uninitiated. This is a thorough, foundational work on presuppositional apologetics and one I commend to everyone.
July 28, 2025
«El objetivo en la apologética, como enseñó el Dr. Bahnsen a sus estudiantes, es acercarse a la persona al nivel de su cosmovisión, visión que está construida sobre un grupo de supuestos operando en torno a la fuente y naturaleza del conocimiento que le da significado a los hechos y las experiencias que encuentra».
— Gary D. Mar
— Gary D. Mar
November 21, 2022
First of all, this book has Greg Bahnsen listed as its author, but seems to actually be a summary of his teaching written by someone else, so that’s a bit odd.
*I find the method of apologetics outlined in this book to be helpful & insightful, but I wonder as to how broadly it should be applied. For one, It seems to me there’s a necessary discussion to be had about the role that apologetics should take within evangelism. Maybe that’s assumed to be outside the scope of this book.
*More specifically to the presuppositional method, I think it should be noted that this kind of argument will not mean anything to (perhaps) the majority of unbelievers. Most people just don’t have the categories or vocabulary to engage with this kind of philosophical deep dive.
*I also think parts of it could easily be hammered too hard in a way that’s unproductive. Telling an atheist, “too bad, you already assume God’s existence” ad nauseam will probably not get you very far. Rather, I see the value in this method as the skill of being able to show people the ways in which their worldview contradicts itself without God.
*I find the method of apologetics outlined in this book to be helpful & insightful, but I wonder as to how broadly it should be applied. For one, It seems to me there’s a necessary discussion to be had about the role that apologetics should take within evangelism. Maybe that’s assumed to be outside the scope of this book.
*More specifically to the presuppositional method, I think it should be noted that this kind of argument will not mean anything to (perhaps) the majority of unbelievers. Most people just don’t have the categories or vocabulary to engage with this kind of philosophical deep dive.
*I also think parts of it could easily be hammered too hard in a way that’s unproductive. Telling an atheist, “too bad, you already assume God’s existence” ad nauseam will probably not get you very far. Rather, I see the value in this method as the skill of being able to show people the ways in which their worldview contradicts itself without God.
March 27, 2023
Practical guide for anyone looking to learn how to defend the faith without setting the unbeliever above God to judge Him. Each chapter has assignments/next steps.
November 27, 2013
I must say that I am happy to see what seems to be an increase of books published on Presuppositional apologetics over the last few years, though one might ask which one among them would be the best introductory text. In my opinion I believe this work serves as the best textbook if you are just getting your feet wet through Presuppositional apologetics or are involved in mentoring someone new to biblical worldview apologetics. I also believe that this work is a lot more systematize than Greg Bahnsen’s more better known Always Ready. The late Bahnsen was a student of Cornelius Van Til, the father of Presuppositional apologetics. As with most of Greg Bahnsen’s apologetics work, this was put together after his death by his followers. Gary DeMar based the book upon a series of lecture Bahnsen delivered to some college students. DeMar does a good job in the book having great discussion questions after the end of each chapter that is helpful for discipleship. I appreciate how the answers to the questions are also given in the end of the book. For my apologetics’ discipleship program I find this feature helpful as a sort of “catechism” review after one is finish with the book. It is not an easy task to teach Presuppositional apologetics or to think about worldviews for that manner and this book did a good job slowly building up to the Presuppositionalist’s argumentation. Each chapter features also an exegetical observation section which I find to be important if we are saying our apologetics methodology does have some Scriptural support. Each chapter also offer further resources for deeper study with some being books and others being articles available on the internet. I appreciate the quotations of atheists, philosophers and nonbelievers throughout the book making the point that a consistent atheistic or unbelieving worldview often lead to despair and irrationality. I know that some have faulted Greg Bahnsen for not emphasizing the Trinity in his presentation of Presuppositional apologetics such as in his incredible work, Van Til’s apologetics. But here in this volume Bahnsen definitely developed more his presentation on the Trinity as the solution to the classic philosophical problem of the One and the Many. If I have any major criticism of this book it would have to be Gary DeMar’s sources on several occasion comes from Wikipedia perhaps too often than I’m comfortable with.
December 9, 2018
I have to say, and I do this honestly, that as far as presuppositional methodology goes, you cannot beat this book! For those seeking to understand the method and apply it I would say this: Pick up a copy of Greg Bahnsen's Always Ready for the understanding (or Jason Lisle's The Ultimate Proof of Creation if Bahnsen seems a bit academic), and a copy of Pushing the Anthithesis for applying. Pushing the Antithesis (composed by Gary Demar), systematically goes through each precondition of intelligibility (The things we need to assume in order to function in the world) and shows why the nonbeliever is living a fallacy and the Christian is living consistently. It does so with invaluable quotes from representatives of the nonbeliever's worldview and ends each section with a Bible study on the particular topic. In addition there is a study guide for small group discussions and applications. For those seeking to learn how to debate/evangelize using Presuppositional apologetics this is a must!
September 13, 2010
This is a good introduction to presuppositional apologetics. It provides twelve easily digestible chapters with review questions, practical applications and suggested reading. For those who have tried vainly debating with an anti-theist by throwing loads of evidence at him, only to have it be dismissed as irrelevant or erroneous, this book helps target the core issue: one's worldview and whether it is rational and logical.
This book is primarily aimed at addressing the atheist's worldview, and doesn't address issues regarding Christianity vs. Islam or other theistic beliefs.
This book is primarily aimed at addressing the atheist's worldview, and doesn't address issues regarding Christianity vs. Islam or other theistic beliefs.
July 15, 2011
After having read Greg Bahnsen's exhaustive anthology and analysis of Cornelius Van Til's apologetic, I then proceeded to read Gary De Mar's short summary of Bahnsen's method of implementing Van Til's apologetic. A good introduction geared for the high school student entering college and wanting to prepare to defend the faith there.
December 16, 2012
Good book, but I can tell that bahnsen didn't write or organize the material.
December 16, 2021
This is a good representation of Bahnsen’s thought. It is based on his Basic Training for Defending the Faith lectures. It stays true to the content but it does not read like a Bahnsen work. It reads much more technical than the lectures are. The updated references are not really needed and honestly just extend the length of the book. I think a version which basically condenses his lectures into book form would be better. This is the third book in the American Vision Trilogy and it is worth reading but it was my least favorite of the three.
February 5, 2023
The Christian worldview can only be challenged with a Christian worldview, thus, as Van Till says, the unbeliever must climb into his fathers lap to slap him.
Bahnsen makes clear that the only biblical way to defend the Christian faith is to stand firmly upon it. The instant we stray from our standard to engage in a "neutral argument" we lose all of our "nuclear weapons." Pushing the unbeliever over his standard or antithesis is when they realize their foolishness or make it plain that they love their foolishness.
Bahnsen makes clear that the only biblical way to defend the Christian faith is to stand firmly upon it. The instant we stray from our standard to engage in a "neutral argument" we lose all of our "nuclear weapons." Pushing the unbeliever over his standard or antithesis is when they realize their foolishness or make it plain that they love their foolishness.
January 16, 2022
I believe this book has to be the most helpful book I have read on Presuppositional Apologetics and I have read a lot of great ones. The thing that I loved the most in this book was the examples given at the end of each other in how to apply what you learn and encourage what to look for in the examples provided. That part of the book gave me the desire to put what I learn to use and gave me a better understanding of how to do that.
August 22, 2018
A good introductory book on presuppositional apologetics. Mostly focused on applying the method to an atheistic or agnostic worldview. I wish more of these kinds of books would apply the method to other worldviews as well. Regardless, it was still a good read.
May 1, 2024
Pretty good overview of Bahnsen's method of presuppositional apologetics. It was not as riveting as I had hoped, but I think it was because this was Gary Demar's compilation of Bahnsen's work - it wasn't written directly by Bahnsen.
April 25, 2022
Good overview of the presuppositional apologetic, in spite of the author's uncharitable representation of the non-Reformed Christian position.
February 22, 2023
Maybe could've been formatted better, but great read either way.
March 4, 2025
Read everything from and about Greg Bahnsen...period.
October 4, 2012
Greg Bahnsen's methodology in presuppositional apologetics is definitely helpful for every Christian apologist to learn and become fluent in. While I consider myself to be more of a evidentially oriented apologist, for anyone to underestimate the power of presuppositional apologetics would be unwise. Bahnsen has shown over his career that presuppositional apologetics can effectively make a convincing case for the existance of God.
June 7, 2012
A very good introduction to the presuppositional apologetic method. However, if you can actually listen to Bahnsen's lectures either before/after reading this book, it will help you understand the material even more.
September 22, 2011
Great.
January 11, 2014
A clear look at the presuppositional apologetic method of its greatest master.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews