I am reading through Pushing the Antithesis by Greg L. Bahnsen (really, compiled by his students/friends after his death). The quote below embodies a vital idea to all apologists:

[A] worldview forms a network of presuppositions, an entire system of assumptions. This network is a complex web of numerous beliefs organized in an interlocking, interdependent, self-contained truth system.

Unfortunately, many evangelical Christians generally think in a piecemeal fashion, focusing on stray individual doctrines and facts rather than a full-scale, coordinate3d system of beliefs. They tend to view the Christian faith as a random assortment of free-standing doctrines rather than as a coherent system of interlocking truth claims. In fact, we see this problematic tendency in the more popular “evidentialist” method of apologetics which defends the faith by focusing on this or that doctrine – for instance, on the “resurrection argument” or the “creation argument.” We must recognize that the Christian faith is a complex system of mutually-supported, intertwined beliefs filling out a broader interdependent worldview.

You must defend the Christian faith as a package deal. (p. 43)

Our apologetic method can tend to be lop-sided when we overemphasize certain arguments (which in and of themselves are good arguments) at the expense of others. We must not forget that our apologetic method must reflect our theological beliefs. For evangelical believers we understand our christian worldview to be an all-encompassing worldview, totally different from the unbeliever’s worldview. At conversion we give ourselves, ALL of ourselves to Christ. This includes not only our beliefs about, for instance, the resurrection and creation, but we also the presuppositions which make such doctrines intelligible.

“You must defend the Christian faith as a package deal.” As apologists we are bound to not only stick our necks out for what we consider the “central” or “core” doctrines, but also for the worldview (the network of interlocking beliefs and presuppositions) which makes them possible and actual.

For example, a historical argument regarding the resurrection of Jesus Christ might be well constructed and sound for believers who are seeking to think in a way consistent with the worldview presented to us by God in Scripture. This argument, however, will not phase an atheist who questions the reliability of history, the accuracy of the transmission of ancient documents, the purpose and meaning of the resurrection asserted by the apologist, etc. These worldview issues lie underneath our historical argument and must be addressed alongside our argument if we are to have success in convincing our atheist friend that Jesus rose from the dead.

The goal of every apologist is (or should be) to provide a good defense of the Christian faith. The nature of the Christian faith demands that we defend not only the “big” doctrines, but the “little” or “supporting” doctrines, along with the biblical/theological presuppositions which comprise the biblical worldview. As evangelists we market the Christian faith as a “package deal,” a complete and total change, as apologists we must defend this “package deal.” We must defend the entire Christian worldview!