What do you think?
Rate this book
Faith Has Its Reasons: Integrative Approaches to Defending the Christian Faith
Ever since the apostle Paul addressed the Stoic and Epicurean philosophers in Athens, relating the Christian worldview to a non- Christian world has been a challenge. And despite Peter’s charge to be "ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you" (1 Peter 3:15), most Christian laypeople have left apologetics—the defense of the faith—to the ecclesiastical "pros." Even after twenty centuries of accumulated experience, many still feel unprepared to offer a coherent defense of their faith to those who question it, attack it, or just want to know more about it. It doesn’t have to be that way! Kenneth Boa and Robert Bowman have assembled a wealth of information about what Christians believe and how to present that faith to an unbelieving world. Remarkable both in its depth of content and ease of accessibility, Faith Has Its Reasons gives Christian laypeople the tools to address such critical questions • Why is belief in God rational despite the prevalence of evil in the world?
• What facts support the church’s testimony that Jesus rose from the dead?
• Can we be certain Christianity is true?
• How can our faith in Christ be based on something more secure than our own understanding without descending into an irrational emotionalism?
• What facts support the church’s testimony that Jesus rose from the dead?
• Can we be certain Christianity is true?
• How can our faith in Christ be based on something more secure than our own understanding without descending into an irrational emotionalism?
658 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2001
20 people are currently reading
182 people want to read
About the author
Kenneth D. Boa
104 books49 followersKenneth Boa is an author, a speaker, and the president of Reflections Ministries. He is the author of over fifty books, including Conformed to His Image, Faith Has Its Reasons, Face to Face, and Rewriting Your Broken Story. He is a contributing editor to the Open Bible, the Promise Keepers Men's Study Bible, and the Leadership Bible, and is the consulting editor of the Zondervan NASB Study Bible.
Boa earned a BS from Case Institute of Technology, a ThM from Dallas Theological Seminary, a PhD from New York University, and a DPhil from the University of Oxford. He teaches a weekly Bible and Faith study at Peachtree Presbyterian Church in Atlanta, Georgia, where he resides with his wife.
Boa earned a BS from Case Institute of Technology, a ThM from Dallas Theological Seminary, a PhD from New York University, and a DPhil from the University of Oxford. He teaches a weekly Bible and Faith study at Peachtree Presbyterian Church in Atlanta, Georgia, where he resides with his wife.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
December 25, 2018
An excellent, and perhaps unparalleled, comparison of apologetic methods. One of the only apologetic books that includes fideism in its survey of apologetics. Although I think there is a version of fideism closer to C.S. Lewis than to Kierkegaard, the book nevertheless deals fairly and charitably with all four positions: evidentialist, classical, Reformed and fideist. Boa concisely deals with the points of contention between the schools, but also shows how one can integrate views, even if one school dominates one's approach.
August 12, 2024
2nd read through in 2024 - Conducted a book walkthrough commentary on the Cave To The Cross Apologetics show - https://cavetothecross.com/faithhasit...
What this book does wonderfully is provide an amazing overview of the history, arguments, and developments of the four main views of apologetics - classical, evidentialism, presuppositional, and feidism. If you need an overview of these types this book is one of the best resources I've read for that purpose. The authors also do a good job of articulating a fair representation of each view and the explanation power of each.
It is not flawless however. It's critiques of presuppositionalism don't seem to really be negatives which is a minor point since that's the position I favor. The biggest flaw, however, is one of the main reasons for the book. It suggests an inclusive view of each of the four views and shows that the use of all of them for particular purposes is the best approach. However, with their approach in mind they seek out support. However, it appears that an appeal to John Frame's view of a tiered approach where the presupposition is developed first and the other three views can be used with intellectual honesty seems to win out. The authors fail to go back over and think about what critiques folks in the presuppositional camp would make.
That being said, I would highly recommend this book as a big overview on the four views of apologetics. This book and the Five Views from the CounterPoint series would be primary. Final Grade - A-
What this book does wonderfully is provide an amazing overview of the history, arguments, and developments of the four main views of apologetics - classical, evidentialism, presuppositional, and feidism. If you need an overview of these types this book is one of the best resources I've read for that purpose. The authors also do a good job of articulating a fair representation of each view and the explanation power of each.
It is not flawless however. It's critiques of presuppositionalism don't seem to really be negatives which is a minor point since that's the position I favor. The biggest flaw, however, is one of the main reasons for the book. It suggests an inclusive view of each of the four views and shows that the use of all of them for particular purposes is the best approach. However, with their approach in mind they seek out support. However, it appears that an appeal to John Frame's view of a tiered approach where the presupposition is developed first and the other three views can be used with intellectual honesty seems to win out. The authors fail to go back over and think about what critiques folks in the presuppositional camp would make.
That being said, I would highly recommend this book as a big overview on the four views of apologetics. This book and the Five Views from the CounterPoint series would be primary. Final Grade - A-
November 24, 2019
This is probably the best book available on comparing apologetic methodologies. It's also one of the only books that truly provides an integrative approach whereby all of the methods (Classical, Presuppositional, etc.) can be used, depending on the circumstances. Four methods are compared in great detail: Classical, Evidential, Reformed, and Fideist. Their strengths are emphasized as well as their weaknesses.
I will say that this is a very lengthy volume. But it's one that you will want on your shelf to consult when you're wondering, for example, how a Reformed apologist might approach evidences. Part of what makes this book so lengthy is that it basically serves as a history of apologetics, spanning centuries of apologetic thought. Aside from apologists who may have grown in popularity within the past decade, you won't find any primary apologist left out of this volume. They leave few stones unturned.
If you count yourself to be a serious apologist and especially one who finds yourself critical of approaches other than your own, you must take the time to read this book.
I will say that this is a very lengthy volume. But it's one that you will want on your shelf to consult when you're wondering, for example, how a Reformed apologist might approach evidences. Part of what makes this book so lengthy is that it basically serves as a history of apologetics, spanning centuries of apologetic thought. Aside from apologists who may have grown in popularity within the past decade, you won't find any primary apologist left out of this volume. They leave few stones unturned.
If you count yourself to be a serious apologist and especially one who finds yourself critical of approaches other than your own, you must take the time to read this book.
August 24, 2020
4.5 stars
The authors have made a great text available for anyone who wants to delve deeper into apologetic method. They cover much of the same ground that may be found in other apologetic handbooks, but they do make some excellent contributions to move the conversation forward. It is especially helpful to see fideism get a fair treatment as this is often neglected as a valid apologetic approach. The sections are laid out in a very readable format, strengths and weaknesses are provided, and the authors work hard at presenting generous and charitable cases for differing approaches - this is most welcome in a field often dominated by polemics and misrepresentation. The authors also deliberately show how apologetics is closely aligned to epistemological considerations. This really helps the reader understand where significant differences lie. Discussions about apologetic methodology can easily be reduced to a dry academic discourse. To combat this tendency, this book includes possible real life situations that provide much needed variety. Ultimately the authors attempt to encourage apologists to integrate approaches, not as a new approach, but as a way of recognizing what is useful in other approaches and supplementing your own approach with these. I cannot agree more!
The authors have made a great text available for anyone who wants to delve deeper into apologetic method. They cover much of the same ground that may be found in other apologetic handbooks, but they do make some excellent contributions to move the conversation forward. It is especially helpful to see fideism get a fair treatment as this is often neglected as a valid apologetic approach. The sections are laid out in a very readable format, strengths and weaknesses are provided, and the authors work hard at presenting generous and charitable cases for differing approaches - this is most welcome in a field often dominated by polemics and misrepresentation. The authors also deliberately show how apologetics is closely aligned to epistemological considerations. This really helps the reader understand where significant differences lie. Discussions about apologetic methodology can easily be reduced to a dry academic discourse. To combat this tendency, this book includes possible real life situations that provide much needed variety. Ultimately the authors attempt to encourage apologists to integrate approaches, not as a new approach, but as a way of recognizing what is useful in other approaches and supplementing your own approach with these. I cannot agree more!
September 7, 2022
This is probably the most impressive apologetics textbook I’ve read. The scope of Boa and Bowman’s project is vast. They attempt to take all of apologetic history and divide it into four major methodologies.
The four methods are: Classical, Evidentialist, Reformed, and Fideist.
Each section is comprehensive of the distinctive aspects of the approach. The sections end with a helpful faux dialogue to display practically what each method looks like in action.
The reason I gave this book 4 and not 5 stars is because I believe there are several issues with the categorizing of a few of apologists in this book. For example, Alvin Plantinga is listed as a “reformed apologist.” This is a laughable claim.
All in all, good book.
The four methods are: Classical, Evidentialist, Reformed, and Fideist.
Each section is comprehensive of the distinctive aspects of the approach. The sections end with a helpful faux dialogue to display practically what each method looks like in action.
The reason I gave this book 4 and not 5 stars is because I believe there are several issues with the categorizing of a few of apologists in this book. For example, Alvin Plantinga is listed as a “reformed apologist.” This is a laughable claim.
All in all, good book.
January 13, 2023
This is not for the faint of heart. While the material is great, it is very long and can be difficult to understand. For a textbook covering the 4 main apologetic systems, I feel as though this could have been MUCH shorter. However, if you are looking for an intensely detailed look at apologetic approaches from every angle, this may be a good read. Because I read this for a college course and spent many long hours taking notes about this in my free time, I can't rate this one very high. If I'm honest, whenever this was assigned, I would sigh and realize I had at least 2 hours of reading and studying to do.
October 27, 2023
This is a great book for a broad sweep and understanding of apologetics. Boa presents a fairly unbiased perspective on the four apologetic systems. I believe that he does a good job not only explaining them but also presenting them in a comparative sense to one another. I enjoyed Boa's presentation of apologetics and how to integrate them into the Christian life.
May 29, 2025
Very thorough, heavy on apologetic theory. Great historical overview. Tended to be a bit more dense than I'd prefer, but that's just me. Really appreciated that it gave the different approaches a fair shake, and attempted to understand and explain the purpose and intention of each.
February 12, 2020
Really good information, but it felt slightly dry and repetitive to me. Not my favorite, but not the worst.
November 4, 2023
Highly recommended to anyone who is interested in understanding the 4 main apologetic systems…
Classical apologetics
Evidentialism
Reformed
Fidelism
Classical apologetics
Evidentialism
Reformed
Fidelism
July 7, 2012
The purpose for this text as articulated by its authors, Kenneth D. Boa and Robert M. Bowman is “… to contribute toward an understanding of these different apologetic methods that will enrich all Christians in their defense of the faith and enable them to speak clearer and with more relevant voices to our present day and beyond” (Boa xiii). In an effort to accomplish this task, Boa and Bowman begin the text with a summary of apologetic history and then conduct a thorough examination of four separate apologetic methodologies; classical, evidentialist, reformed and fideism. The authors treat the four methodologies equally by examining their histories, exploring their methods and positions on important issues, offering a practical example of the methodology in action and subjecting each to twelve separate metapologetic and apologetic questions. Admirably, the authors conclude their study with an examination on how the different methodologies may be integrated.
I was impressed by the authors’ summary of the challenges postmodernism presents apologists. Boa and Bowman define postmodernism as a philosophical movement that believes truth is subjective (Boa 162). This definition is followed up with the following example, “When the space shuttle Challenger exploded, no one would have been satisfied had NASA issued a statement claiming that the cause of the accident was different for different people” (Boa 163). This may be an oversimplified treatment of postmodernism but the example helped clarify the matter for me. This is an important issue that needs to be understood by all who seek to form a meaningful apologetic.
Another unique aspect of this text is the authors’ use of fictional dialogue to demonstrate a practical example of each apologetic methodology in action. While the scenarios seemed a bit contrived, they served their purpose well. For instance, in response to the problem of evil, the fictional reformed apologist says, “But how do you determine what is evil and what is not? Calling things “evil” assumes that there is a standard of good that transcends the world or human race [God]” (Boa 325). This example of the transcendent argument for God clarifies the issue much better than a simple definition would.
Most of all, I appreciated the authors’ notion that a good apologetic is situational. As of late, I have pondered thoughts of concern over apologists who place their allegiance to methodology above the needs of the unsaved. Thus, I was elated when the authors wrote, “… apologists should use common sense and try to match their apologetic to the person with whom they are speaking” (Boa 515). Furthermore, the authors suggest that an apologetic is only useful if it serves to move the unbeliever closer to accepting Christianity (Boa 516). A chart offered on page 517 provides a practical example of how an apologist may use a variety of methodologies in response to questions unbelievers may ask on their journey to faith. While this skill of blending methodologies may be beyond my current abilities, it is validating to know that Boa and Bowman share my concerns.
In summary, this text serves its purpose well. Upon reading it, I feel much better prepared to continue my study of apologetic methodologies and to integrate their practice into my daily witness of Christ. This book should be read by anyone who has an interest in the subject of apologetics and wishes to be brought up to speed regarding current apologetic debates and the issues that face all who hope to engage in the task.
I was impressed by the authors’ summary of the challenges postmodernism presents apologists. Boa and Bowman define postmodernism as a philosophical movement that believes truth is subjective (Boa 162). This definition is followed up with the following example, “When the space shuttle Challenger exploded, no one would have been satisfied had NASA issued a statement claiming that the cause of the accident was different for different people” (Boa 163). This may be an oversimplified treatment of postmodernism but the example helped clarify the matter for me. This is an important issue that needs to be understood by all who seek to form a meaningful apologetic.
Another unique aspect of this text is the authors’ use of fictional dialogue to demonstrate a practical example of each apologetic methodology in action. While the scenarios seemed a bit contrived, they served their purpose well. For instance, in response to the problem of evil, the fictional reformed apologist says, “But how do you determine what is evil and what is not? Calling things “evil” assumes that there is a standard of good that transcends the world or human race [God]” (Boa 325). This example of the transcendent argument for God clarifies the issue much better than a simple definition would.
Most of all, I appreciated the authors’ notion that a good apologetic is situational. As of late, I have pondered thoughts of concern over apologists who place their allegiance to methodology above the needs of the unsaved. Thus, I was elated when the authors wrote, “… apologists should use common sense and try to match their apologetic to the person with whom they are speaking” (Boa 515). Furthermore, the authors suggest that an apologetic is only useful if it serves to move the unbeliever closer to accepting Christianity (Boa 516). A chart offered on page 517 provides a practical example of how an apologist may use a variety of methodologies in response to questions unbelievers may ask on their journey to faith. While this skill of blending methodologies may be beyond my current abilities, it is validating to know that Boa and Bowman share my concerns.
In summary, this text serves its purpose well. Upon reading it, I feel much better prepared to continue my study of apologetic methodologies and to integrate their practice into my daily witness of Christ. This book should be read by anyone who has an interest in the subject of apologetics and wishes to be brought up to speed regarding current apologetic debates and the issues that face all who hope to engage in the task.
September 30, 2014
Great overview of the main approaches to apologetics. I love the way this book is laid out. Here are some more detailed thoughts . . .
Faith Has Its Reasons sheds valuable light in explaining the four major approaches to apologetics, comparing them among each other, and pointing out their respective strengths and weaknesses. The authors are aware that their summaries might be taken as over-idealizing or putting apologists into categories in which they do not completely belong. But the survey nature of the book makes these categorizations both necessary and helpful.
The book’s central thesis might be obscured during its objective and thorough exposition of these various approaches, but it is made clear near the end: “An apologetic is valid and valuable if it provides the basis for a non-Christian moving at all closer to embracing the Christian faith” (10412). Thus, perhaps the greatest value of the book lies in its suggesting ways to move beyond metapologetical narrow-mindedness, showing (with the help of Frame’s perspectivalism) how to locate these approaches in their normative, situational and existential contexts, and how they can complement, rather than conflict with, each other.
Since a major purpose of the book is to provide an overview of the four main approaches to apologetics, and suggest “the complementary ways in which different approaches to apologetics can be fruitfully related to each other,” the authors do not advocate a single approach to the function and relationship of reason to faith. In keeping with their favoring of an integrationist approach to leverage movement toward Christianity, the authors would most likely view reason and faith as complementary aspects of the apologetic task.
The authors themselves would most likely espouse the view that evidence is a tool to leverage movement toward Christianity, but that whether it is used must depend upon the mental and/or emotional commitments of the person who is on the receiving end of the apologetic effort. For example, if the person objects to Christianity based on specific data that he thinks contradicts Christianity, then an evidential approach (which marshals scientific and historical evidence) would probably be most effective (10427). On the other hand, if the person is stubbornly skeptical, then evidences will have little or no sway with him, and the apologist would be wise to use elements of Reformed apologetics instead (10427).
Faith Has Its Reasons sheds valuable light in explaining the four major approaches to apologetics, comparing them among each other, and pointing out their respective strengths and weaknesses. The authors are aware that their summaries might be taken as over-idealizing or putting apologists into categories in which they do not completely belong. But the survey nature of the book makes these categorizations both necessary and helpful.
The book’s central thesis might be obscured during its objective and thorough exposition of these various approaches, but it is made clear near the end: “An apologetic is valid and valuable if it provides the basis for a non-Christian moving at all closer to embracing the Christian faith” (10412). Thus, perhaps the greatest value of the book lies in its suggesting ways to move beyond metapologetical narrow-mindedness, showing (with the help of Frame’s perspectivalism) how to locate these approaches in their normative, situational and existential contexts, and how they can complement, rather than conflict with, each other.
Since a major purpose of the book is to provide an overview of the four main approaches to apologetics, and suggest “the complementary ways in which different approaches to apologetics can be fruitfully related to each other,” the authors do not advocate a single approach to the function and relationship of reason to faith. In keeping with their favoring of an integrationist approach to leverage movement toward Christianity, the authors would most likely view reason and faith as complementary aspects of the apologetic task.
The authors themselves would most likely espouse the view that evidence is a tool to leverage movement toward Christianity, but that whether it is used must depend upon the mental and/or emotional commitments of the person who is on the receiving end of the apologetic effort. For example, if the person objects to Christianity based on specific data that he thinks contradicts Christianity, then an evidential approach (which marshals scientific and historical evidence) would probably be most effective (10427). On the other hand, if the person is stubbornly skeptical, then evidences will have little or no sway with him, and the apologist would be wise to use elements of Reformed apologetics instead (10427).
April 25, 2023
Overall: would be really good, amazing as a textbook for dedicated study. Fair and comprehensive overviews without sacrificing much nuance, plus legitimate independent insights beyond merely summarizing, all couched in firm Biblical doctrinal understanding and Biblical mindset.
Cons:
-Probably missed some minor nuances or context at times
-A bit repetitive in summarizing prior content in some sections
-Possible misclassifications here and there, but at some point it's (as they note) a rough judgment call highlighting similar aspects
-Its bit about personality types at the end was a good idea in abstract but I thought it a little silly/not-well-founded to bring in specific guesses about them without much support
Pros:
-In presenting perspectives of authors who are hard to understand, Boa and Bowman qualify their statements well, and in general it seems (as I am not an expert) like they've really done their research into how the views they presented might respond to certain points.
-While being repetitive is a con for a straight read-through, I think it's very helpful for its role as a textbook (where certain excerpts can be read independently) or as a reference in the future. So it's a price I'll pay I suppose; I'm a slow reader.
-The authors really steel-man the perspectives they are presenting, and it is a service to seek a healthy spirit of unity in this field, while still calling out the potential unbiblical pitfalls that can result if an approach is accepted without qualification.
-The layout with the mock conversations at the end was really fun, as I always looked forward to reading through the approaches to see how they would play out in the conversation bits.
This took me forever to get through, partly due to it being quite repetitive at parts. So I was thinking of giving it 4 stars, but its impressive last few chapters presented new ideas, and its really (as I see it) novel/effective/neat layout tipped me over to 5 stars as I look back on it. Still I'd say 4 stars as a read, 5 stars as a resource or textbook to excerpt from.
Cons:
-Probably missed some minor nuances or context at times
-A bit repetitive in summarizing prior content in some sections
-Possible misclassifications here and there, but at some point it's (as they note) a rough judgment call highlighting similar aspects
-Its bit about personality types at the end was a good idea in abstract but I thought it a little silly/not-well-founded to bring in specific guesses about them without much support
Pros:
-In presenting perspectives of authors who are hard to understand, Boa and Bowman qualify their statements well, and in general it seems (as I am not an expert) like they've really done their research into how the views they presented might respond to certain points.
-While being repetitive is a con for a straight read-through, I think it's very helpful for its role as a textbook (where certain excerpts can be read independently) or as a reference in the future. So it's a price I'll pay I suppose; I'm a slow reader.
-The authors really steel-man the perspectives they are presenting, and it is a service to seek a healthy spirit of unity in this field, while still calling out the potential unbiblical pitfalls that can result if an approach is accepted without qualification.
-The layout with the mock conversations at the end was really fun, as I always looked forward to reading through the approaches to see how they would play out in the conversation bits.
This took me forever to get through, partly due to it being quite repetitive at parts. So I was thinking of giving it 4 stars, but its impressive last few chapters presented new ideas, and its really (as I see it) novel/effective/neat layout tipped me over to 5 stars as I look back on it. Still I'd say 4 stars as a read, 5 stars as a resource or textbook to excerpt from.
October 27, 2013
One hopes the worldview phase among academic evangelicals is beginning to die out. It was fun while it lasted, but it distracted hundreds from more useful endeavors. That said, among apologetics and worldview books, this one is decent. It has several new approaches and is fairly useful.
Like others, he summarizes the different approaches to apologetics (Evidentialism, Thomism, Presuppositionalism, and Hippie Fideism). He is fair and usually impressive in how he handles each school. While some of these schools overlap, they capture the different nuances.
Cons:
Boa suggests that one choose an apologetics methodology based on the Myers-Brigg indicator test! This is beyond laughable. One chooses a methodology based on truth-factors, not psychology. Still, an interesting (if humorous) suggestion.
Like others, he summarizes the different approaches to apologetics (Evidentialism, Thomism, Presuppositionalism, and Hippie Fideism). He is fair and usually impressive in how he handles each school. While some of these schools overlap, they capture the different nuances.
Cons:
Boa suggests that one choose an apologetics methodology based on the Myers-Brigg indicator test! This is beyond laughable. One chooses a methodology based on truth-factors, not psychology. Still, an interesting (if humorous) suggestion.
April 10, 2013
Kenneth Boa and Robert Bowman do an excellent job of providing a "guided tour" of the history of apologetics in church history. They also offer some helpful tips in the concluding chapters on how to integrate the various approaches to apologetics. This book is somewhat lengthy, and difficult reading at times, but worthwhile if you are interested in such things.
May 29, 2013
A thorough, helpful, and critical look at various apologetical methods of defending Christianity. It was particularly useful in helping me sort through my own biases, methods, weaknesses, and strengths in how I present the reasons for my trust in Jesus. I will undoubtedly read parts of this again and again.
It's worth noting that this book is free via PDF parts from Ken Boa's website.
It's worth noting that this book is free via PDF parts from Ken Boa's website.
January 2, 2014
A good, comprehensive overview of four, major apologetic methods. The authors survey the positions, famous proponents, and strengths/weaknesses. The authors conclude that effective apologetics will make use of all four positions. Recommended for anyone who is interested in learning more about the discipline of apologetics, and the diversity within apologetics.
June 2, 2014
This book does an excellent job of helping the Bible student to understand the different methods of defending the Gospel. He makes a good case for tying these methods to an individuals theological foundation.
October 15, 2010
Massive encyclopedic tome on 5 apologetic systems: classical, evidential, “Reformed”, fideism, and integrative.
December 15, 2016
A decent book/textbook that covers the four major approaches to apologetics.
September 6, 2012
Still the best intro to apologetics text out there. Fair, balanced, accessible, with an equal emphasis on history, methodology, and application. Great book.
September 7, 2020
Meticulous, Exhaustive, and Accessible.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews