Editing Francis Schaeffer (section)

== Apologetics ==

Schaeffer's approach to Christian apologetics was primarily influenced by [[Herman Dooyeweerd]],{{Failed verification |date=August 2011}} [[Edward John Carnell]], and [[Cornelius Van Til]], but he was not known to be a strict [[presuppositionalist]] in the Van Tillian tradition. His approach to culture was heavily influenced by his friendship with [[Hans Rookmaaker]]. In a 1948 article in ''The Bible Today'', Schaeffer explained his own apologetics and how he walked a middle path between [[evidentialism]] and presuppositionalism, noting that "If the unsaved man was consistent he would be an atheist in religion, an irrationalist in philosophy (including a complete uncertainty concerning 'natural laws'), and completely a-moral in the widest sense."<ref name= Schaeffer1>Schaeffer, Francis, "A Review of a Review", in ''The Bible Today'', October 1948, pp. 7–9. Accessed August 21, 2006. Reprinted at [http://www.pcahistory.org/documents/schaefferreview.html PCA Historical Center].</ref> [[J. Budziszewski]] summarizes the article about this ''middle path'' approach by writing:

{{blockquote| Presuppositionalists, he held, are right to assert that the ultimate premises of Christian and anti–Christian systems of thought are utterly at odds in relation to their origin. On the other hand, evidentialists are right to assert that between Christian and anti–Christian systems of thought there is always a point of contact in the shape of reality itself. The reason for this point of contact, he argued, is that nonbelievers cannot bring themselves to be completely consistent with their own presuppositions, and this inconsistency is a result of what many call common grace and is in fact the reality of God having made, and spoken into, a defined and unavoidable creation.  "Thus, illogically", he wrote, "men have in their accepted [[worldview]]s various amounts of that which is ours.  But, illogical though it may be, it is there and we can appeal to it."<ref>{{cite journal | url =https://www.firstthings.com/article/2000/05/market-or-moral-failure | title = Evidentialists and Presuppositionalists | department = Letters | first = J | last = Budziszewski |author-link=J. Budziszewski| journal = First Things |date=May 2000 | access-date = May 19, 2019}}</ref>}}

Schaeffer came to use this ''middle path'' as the basis for his method of evangelism which he called "Taking the roof off".<ref>{{Citation | first = William | last = Edgar | title = Two Christian Warriors: Cornelius Van Til and Francis A. Schaeffer Compared | journal = Westminster Theological Journal | volume = 57 | number = 1 |date=Spring 1995 | pages = 57–80}}.</ref>  An example of ''Taking the roof off'' in written form can be found in Schaeffer's work entitled ''Death in the City.''<ref name = Schaeffer2>Schaeffer, Francis, "Chapter 9: The Universe and Two Chairs", in ''Death in the City'', reprinted at [http://sentinellenehemie.free.fr/schaeffer3_gb.html Nehemiah's Prayer Watch]. Retrieved August 22, 2006.</ref> [[Nancy Pearcey]] also describes two books by Schaeffer, ''Escape From Reason'' and ''The God Who Is There'' in this way:

{{blockquote| In these books, Schaeffer explains the history of the two-story division of knowledge, often referred to as the fact/value split. He also describes his apologetics method, which combined elements of both evidentialism and presuppositionalism.<ref>{{Citation | first = Nancy | last = Pearcey | year = 2004 | title = Total Truth: Liberating Christianity From Its Cultural Captivity | place = Wheaton, IL | publisher = Crossway Books | page = 453}}.</ref>}}

=== Influence of Rushdoony ===

In the 1960s Schaeffer read the works of [[Christian Reconstructionism|Reconstructionist]] theologian [[Rousas John Rushdoony]] with appreciation, and according to Barry Hankins, "it is quite likely that Schaeffer's belief that the United States was founded on a Christian base came in part from Rushdoony."<ref name= "shaping" /> Schaeffer later lost this fervor because Rushdoony was a [[Postmillennialism|postmillennialist]], holding the doctrine that the kingdom of God will be built on earth before the second coming of Jesus, while Schaeffer was a [[Premillennialism|premillennialist]], holding that the kingdom of God will only be ushered in with the second coming.<ref name="shaping" />

Schaeffer thought that Rushdoony's system would require a merger of church and state, which he opposed. He held that the principles, not the actual details, of Old Testament civil law were applicable under the New Covenant of Jesus. He wrote "The moral law [of the Old Testament], of course, is constant, but the civil law only was operative for the Old Testament theocracy. I do not think there is any indication of a theocracy in the New Testament until Christ returns as king."<ref name="shaping" />