Jamin Hubner mentioned my blurb about Kerrigan Skelly’s video on presuppositional apologetics on Pros Apologian (thanks!). He offered some good comments that bear repeating:

First is the rejection of natural theology. The unbeliever has knowledge of God, but due to his depravity (the first point of Calvinism TULIP) he suppresses it. The classical arguments will never suffice for the same reason 66 books of evidence won’t suffice: he’s spiritually dead, and he needs to be shown his bias against God before gaining a proper orientation of life. Without the Calvinist/biblical teaching of depravity, one could adhere to classicalism as much as presuppositionalism regarding this central issue.

Second is the absolute sovereignty of God and Lordship of Christ coupled with sola scriptura. Classical apologetics is built from a Roman Catholic foundation that does not require that a believer (a) develop an apologetic method from Scripture or (b) begin with Scripture to engage in apologetics. Both are distinctive of presuppositional apologetics. In short, presuppositional Arminians (ie Kerrigan Skelly, Tim Chaffey, etc.) are simply unaware of their inconsistency, and need to come into grips with the fact that our theology gives rise to our apologetic methodology. If that can be admitted, it is clear that only presuppositional apologetics fits Reformed theology – that is, only biblical apologetics fits biblical theology.