Ever since the apostle Paul addressed the Stoic and Epicurean philosophers in Athens, relating the Christian world-view to a non-Christian world has been a challenge. And despite Peter's charge to be ready to make a defence to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you (1 Peter 3:15), most Christian laypeople have left apologetics-the defence of the faith-to the ecclesiastical pros.
Faith Has Its Reasons is a study of four different models of how apologetics should be done, an assessment of their strengths and weaknesses, and a proposal for integrating the best insights of each. Kenneth Boa and Robert Bowman have assembled a wealth of information about what Christians believe and how to present that faith to an unbelieving world. Remarkable both in its depth of content and ease of accessibility, Faith Has Its Reasons gives Christian laypeople the tools to address such critical questions as:
- Why is belief in God rational despite the prevalence of evil in the world?
- What facts support the church's testimony that Jesus rose from the dead?
- Can we be certain Christianity is true?
- How can our faith in Christ be based on something more secure than our own understanding without descending into an irrational emotionalism?
Faith Has Its Reasons is a study of four different models of how apologetics should be done, an assessment of their strengths and weaknesses, and a proposal for integrating the best insights of each. Kenneth Boa and Robert Bowman have assembled a wealth of information about what Christians believe and how to present that faith to an unbelieving world. Remarkable both in its depth of content and ease of accessibility, Faith Has Its Reasons gives Christian laypeople the tools to address such critical questions as:
- Why is belief in God rational despite the prevalence of evil in the world?
- What facts support the church's testimony that Jesus rose from the dead?
- Can we be certain Christianity is true?
- How can our faith in Christ be based on something more secure than our own understanding without descending into an irrational emotionalism?
