{"title":"夺回火星山","authors":"Danielle Wiley","doi":"10.1163/27725472-09204003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Presuppositionalists argue that Paul’s address at Mars Hill offers biblical grounds for presuppositional apologetics and that evidentialists misinterpret the same address in support of their own position. A critical evaluation of this claim requires the examination of six issues in Acts 17:16–34 which have implications for apologetic method: (1) Paul’s pre-Mars Hill ministry in Athens; (2) The captatio benevolentiae of Paul’s exordium; (3) The Unknown God; (4) The parallels to Greek philosophical thought in the body of Paul’s address; (5) Paul’s citation of Greek poets; and (6) Paul’s appeal to the resurrection as proof. A correct interpretation of these issues will prove that the presuppositional criticism of evidentialism is unsubstantiated and that Paul’s Mars Hill address better fits a broad evidentialist apologetic than a presuppositional apologetic.","PeriodicalId":355176,"journal":{"name":"Evangelical Quarterly","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retaking Mars Hill\",\"authors\":\"Danielle Wiley\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/27725472-09204003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Presuppositionalists argue that Paul’s address at Mars Hill offers biblical grounds for presuppositional apologetics and that evidentialists misinterpret the same address in support of their own position. A critical evaluation of this claim requires the examination of six issues in Acts 17:16–34 which have implications for apologetic method: (1) Paul’s pre-Mars Hill ministry in Athens; (2) The captatio benevolentiae of Paul’s exordium; (3) The Unknown God; (4) The parallels to Greek philosophical thought in the body of Paul’s address; (5) Paul’s citation of Greek poets; and (6) Paul’s appeal to the resurrection as proof. A correct interpretation of these issues will prove that the presuppositional criticism of evidentialism is unsubstantiated and that Paul’s Mars Hill address better fits a broad evidentialist apologetic than a presuppositional apologetic.\",\"PeriodicalId\":355176,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evangelical Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evangelical Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/27725472-09204003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evangelical Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27725472-09204003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Presuppositionalists argue that Paul’s address at Mars Hill offers biblical grounds for presuppositional apologetics and that evidentialists misinterpret the same address in support of their own position. A critical evaluation of this claim requires the examination of six issues in Acts 17:16–34 which have implications for apologetic method: (1) Paul’s pre-Mars Hill ministry in Athens; (2) The captatio benevolentiae of Paul’s exordium; (3) The Unknown God; (4) The parallels to Greek philosophical thought in the body of Paul’s address; (5) Paul’s citation of Greek poets; and (6) Paul’s appeal to the resurrection as proof. A correct interpretation of these issues will prove that the presuppositional criticism of evidentialism is unsubstantiated and that Paul’s Mars Hill address better fits a broad evidentialist apologetic than a presuppositional apologetic.