1

There are always three sides to every story: your side, the other side and the truth.Author
Unknown

Introduction
Evidentialism is a method of apologetics that uses evidentiary proof to substantiate
Christian beliefs about God and the universe. As a scientist, scientific methods are used to
explain and rationalize observations to gain knowledge in a constant search for a clearer image
of the truth. One of the greatest concepts of science is that as more data is generated a more
accurate picture of the truth emerges. In theology, like science, methods are used to study,
explain and rationalize belief to gain a clearer picture of the truth of God. God has given us both
the ability to reason and science to enable humanity to study His creation, learn the truth and
ultimately a clearer understanding of God is revealed. Evidentialism uses the evidentiary proof
to search for this truth and then to use it to explain God to humanity. In the opening, the three
sides to every story can be used to take a look of evidentialism. Your side describes the
evidentialist method of apologetics, the other side is a critical look at the methodology and
the truth seeks to evaluate how evidentialism has been used in the past and how it may be used
effectively in the future.
Your Side
Evidentialism emphasizes empirical reason, seeking to prove the logical conference and
rational truth in a persons faith in Christ.
1
The truth is sought in terms of reasonable, logical
argument based on factual evidence. The facts of evidentialism may be found in the physical
world such as the nature of the universe, nature itself, history, science, archeology, biology and

1
Ergun Caner, Apologetics 500: Lecture Four, The Major Methodologies of Apologetics: Three Major Models
Class lecture notes, (Lynchburg, Virginia: Liberty University, date unknown), 67.
2
other natural sources. Evidentialism also seeks truth through human intellect such as logical
proofs, knowledge, and further functions of the human mind. God has structured reality in such
a way that all His creatures can know truth.
2
For the evidentialist, God has already placed the
ability to know Him more fully within His creation. The key to unlocking this evidence was
given through Jesus Christ. John 1:9 revealed that Christ is the true light, which enlightens
everyone, was coming into the world. Jesus came bringing both bringing evidence about God
and supplied evidence as God. Reason (ooo) is the light which enlightens every person.
3

Evidence such as miracles, teachings and rising from the dead that were historical events
recorded as historical fact. The truth-claims of Christianity are judged credible using the same
standards by which all truth-claims are judged credible (e.g. scientific hypotheses, historical
facts), and those standards are external to Scripture. Thus, Christian faith is rendered worth of
belief by external criteria, such as reason (rationalism) and evidences (empiricism).
4

Evidentialism involves a reason-giving conception required for a person to be
considered rational in holding a particular beliefmotivated by the desire to offer good reasons
and arguments for why a person should conclude that Christian belief is credible and true.
5

Thus far, the foundation of evidentialism has been discussed based on evidentiary fact and
human reason. How is this beneficial to defending and explaining the faith behind Christianity?
The answer is found in Christ. When confronted by the Pharisees and Sanhedrin, Peter and John
gave a defense of what they believed using evidentialism. Then they called them in again and
commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John replied,

2
W.G. Phillips, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2
nd
ed. (Edited by Walter A. Elwell), Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Baker Academic, 2001), 84.
3
Ibid.
4
Ibid.
5
Thomas Provenzola, The Popular Encyclopedia of Apologetics (Edited by Ed Hindson and Ergun Caner),
(Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2008), 208.
3
Which is right in Gods eyes: to listen to you, or to him? You be the judges! As for us, we
cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard (Acts 4:18-20). Notice, that when
called to give a defense, they did so based on historical fact rather than on belief. God has
provided ample support for the truth not only in His Word but also through human reason,
history and science.
The Other Side
Based on the preceding argument, it would seem that evidentialism must be widely
accepted. The disciples used evidence to offer an apology; evidentialism makes sense logically
because it is based on what must be irrefutable facts. However, several key objections need be
raised. First, several assumptions must be made about sinful humanity including the ability to
identify, understand and reason about spiritual matters. Jesus said that when he, the Spirit of
truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth (John 16:13). However Paul, when speaking about
unregenerate humanity, says, the person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come
from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they
are discerned only through the Spirit (1 Cor. 2:14). The mind of unregenerate humanity is not
presented in Scripture as being neutral but as being unable to receive or perceive spiritual truth
(Rom. 1:18-32, 5:6, 8, 10 [enemies]; 8:7; 1 Cor. 1:18-2:14; Eph. 2:1).
6
Indeed, the basic
assumption is that humanity can come to know Christ based on evidence presented about God.
However, it is the partnership between the Christian apologist and the unbeliever that knowledge
is imparted and it is through the Spirit of truth that the unbeliever is convicted and drawn into a
saving relationship with Jesus Christ. The argument against evidentialism is true when relying

6
Elwell, 84.
4
on the sole persuasive power of the apologist, but is false when considering the power of the
Holy Spirit at work within the unbeliever.
The Threshold Problem
Further, A. R. Booth presents two additional problems namely the threshold problem
and the availability problem. Evidentialism has been accused of leaving the notion of what
counts as sufficient evidence drastically ill explained. For it is not enough, according to the
evidentialist, for a subject to believe a proposition according to some evidence, he must believe it
according to sufficient evidence. Similarly a subject must withhold belief in a proposition where
there is insufficient evidence and disbelieve a proposition where there is sufficient evidence
against it. The problem is how to determine when the threshold between some evidence and
sufficient evidence is crossed.
7
Booth explains that the first problem with evidentialism is the
threshold of what is sufficient evidence to support a claim. How much evidence is necessary for
the proposition to be true? He supposes that evidentialists cannot provide sufficient evidence to
cross the threshold of faith. However, the book of Hebrews does not defend this point, Now
faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen (Hebrews 11:1 KJV).
Evidence (cc_qoo) is a legal term that means, to convictin the sense of refutation of
adversaries.
8
Faith and evidentialism work in parallels providing evidentiary support for
Christianity.
The Availability Problem
The Availability Problem is associated with the question: how do evidential

7
A. R. Booth, The Two Faces of Evidentialism, Erkenn 67, 2007, 406.
8
Spiros Zodihes, The Complete Word Study Dictionary, (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers), 562.
5
considerations (by themselves) settle when we are to consider evidence as available evidence?
9

In this problem, the evidential considerations cannot determine interest or that all of the evidence
will be used to support the argument. This argument presupposes that an individual already has
an opinion regarding a proposition and that some evidence, although available, will not be used
to alter the decision. Secondly, this problem introduces the point that not all evidence is known.
There is more evidence that has not been discovered or introduced. To define this argument in
simple terms, a person who has reached a decision may have done so without considering all of
the available evidence or all of the evidence is unavailable and thus cannot come to a conclusion
of the truth. First, this view does not take into account the guidance of the Holy Spirit living
within the apologist. As reviewed earlier, the Spirit of truth is at work guiding Christians in all
truth (John 16:13). Secondly, this argument makes the assumption that a conclusion cannot be
rationally and logically be decided unless all information is available. Again, looking at
Hebrews 11:1, faith works in parallel with evidence to provide the evidentiary support.
Moreover, faith (tioti) means a firm persuasion, conviction, belief in the truthnot the
outcome of imagination but based on fact, such as the reality of the resurrection of Christ (1 Cor.
15), and such it becomes the basis of realistic hope.
10
The arguments against the evidentialism
view of apologetics, while compelling, are not consistent with Scripture. In fact, the Scripture
instructs the believer to do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman
who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth (2 Tim. 2:15,
NIV 1984).

9
Booth, 409.
10
Zodhiates, 1162.
6
The Truth
In the preceding evaluation, a look at evidentialism apologetics has revealed that it was a method
that was used by the early apostles to defend the faith. All throughout the New Testament, the
early church was based on historical events and eyewitness evidence that fueled growth and
provided validity to the faith. Early church apologist, Justin Martyr used reason and logic to
derive his logos doctrine and argued that Christianity was really not a new religion, but reached
back to the original religion of humanity and represented the culmination of Gods plans forecast
in the prophets of the Old Testament.
11
Later apologist, Thomas Aquinas would argue that
reason could demonstrate the existence of God. He formulated five proofs for the existence of
God.
12
His principles were applied to various areas including ethics, law and government. He
reasoned on the principle that Grace does not nullify nature, but completes it.
13
Later
apologist Joseph Butler wrote The Analogy of Religion that is considered by many to be the
standard of apologetics.
14
He believed that reasonable people will choose the best option given
the evidence, although absolute certainty does not exist in science or religion. Therefore,
reasonable people are morally and intellectually obligated to accept Christianity and the Bible.
15

Norman Geisler said that the starting point for all apologetic witness is mans religious
experience (of the heart) and rational search (of the mind).
16
His test of truth involves two
parts. The first is that the facts are undeniable and second no statement can be true or false
simultaneously. Therefore, reason champions the cause of truth.
17
Finally, in todays apologetic

11
Everett Ferguson, Church History Volume One: From Christ to Pre-Reformation: The Rise and Growth
of the Church in Its Cultural, Intellectual, and Political Context, Zondervan, 2009, Kindle Location 1529.
12
Ibid., Kindle Location 9178.
13
Ibid., Kindle Location 9193.
14
Caner, 75.
15
Caner, 76.
16
Ibid.
17
Ibid., 77.
7
community apologists such as Ravi Zacharias, William Lane Craig, John Warwich Montgomery,
Gary Habermas and Ergun Caner all champion the cause of Christ by providing a defense for the
faith using evidential apologetics.
Conclusion
In this paper, an overview of evidential apologetics has been presented, some common
arguments both for and against and some champions today and throughout history and their
contributions to this method. As a scientist, I am constantly in search of truth. As a pastor, I am
constantly searching to know more about God, the ultimate source of truth. I believe that the
evidence exists in both the historical accounts and through empirical evidence for any reasonable
person to understand that there is a God and that Jesus, as the Son of God, really lived, really
died and really rose again. I believe that these are indisputable facts that have been made
ineffective because of liberal teachings and a lack of evidential apologetics. I further believe that
when confronted with truth, people can and do make the decision to follow Christ. The Holy
Spirit reveals truth to them so that they may come into relationship with Christ through salvation.
Going forward, I am an evidential apologist and I will continue to do so by preaching and
teaching the truth of Gods Word and seeking knowledge to further solidify the truth of
Scripture. One of my favorite sayings is that science will always confirm Scripture. The more I
continue learning and reading about archeological finds and as I watch humanities knowledge
increase, the evidence continues to point more convincingly toward God and Christ. Sadly, few
people can remove the blinders of unbelief and see the truth set before them. Human beings
wildly differ over questions of meanings (modernity, postmodernity) and ethics: e.g., who lives
(human genome studies) and who dies (abortion, euthanasia).
18
Perhaps a few more apologists

18
Elwell, 84.
8
defending the faith and providing evidence can help to bring truth to this diverging culture.
Norman Geislers claims maintain that the truth is undeniable and there must be truth. May
people come to know Truth and may he set them free.
9
Bibliography
Booth, A. R. The Two Faces of Evidentialism. Erkenn 67 (2007): 401-417.
Caner, Ergun. Apologetics 500: Lecture Four, The Major Methodologies of Apologetics: Three
Major Models Class lecture notes. Liberty University, Lynchburg, Virginia (date
unknown).
Ferguson, Everett. Church History Volume One: From Christ to Pre-Reformation: The Rise and
Growth of the Church in Its Cultural, Intellectual, and Political Context, Zondervan,
2009.
Phillips, W.G. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2
nd
ed. (Edited by Walter A. Elwell). Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2001.
Provenzola, Thomas. The Popular Encyclopedia of Apologetics (Edited by Ed Hindson and
Ergun Caner), (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers), 2008.
Zodihes, Spiros. The Complete Word Study Dictionary, (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers),
1992.