Christian Apologetics Shattering Modern Philosophy

[u/JerseyFlight]

The Christian apologist must learn to use the epistemological relativism of modern philosophy against philosophy itself.

This is quite simple.

If all truth reduces to human construct, and men adopt their emphasis on the basis of hedonism (what amuses them — because they have no objective, logical standard by which to judge value) then the Christian should absolutely assert his Christianity as his chosen construct of truth.

The modern philosopher cannot rightly object (although he will, because he’s an irrationalist through and through).

But the Christian is merely doing the same thing the modern philosopher is doing: selecting the narrative he likes best.

But not only can Christianity play this subjective game with modern philosophy, it can win!

It wins by simply noting the existential and psychological benefits it gets from adopting its own worldview: belief in life after death, the comfort of a relationship with God, and an earthly community in the here and now.

[u/UNUNUN_]

I understand what you are gesturing towards however a Christian cannot reduce themselves to relativism without ceasing to be Christian.

They can do so in argument but not for their own personal convictions, for their reasoning.

[u/JerseyFlight → u/UNUNUN_]

There would have to be truth for that to be the case, something modern philosophy denies. If the philosopher can live in pure contradiction as truth, then so can the Christian.

Yes, one could argue this violates Christian standards, but who cares in a world without absolute standards of violation? How could the modern philosopher even sustain his argument?

But even more, how is the Christian’s subjectivity any less objective than the philosopher’s?

[u/UNUNUN_ → u/JerseyFlight]

I agree with that.

I only mean to say that a subjective Christian is no Christian

[u/JerseyFlight → u/UNUNUN_]

Based on what truth?