ABSTRACT
This chapter demonstrates that scientism cannot be justified by science itself while verificationism cannot be verified; these views fail to meet their own demands. Moreover, both science and verification require philosophical principles of reasoning which can be used by the arguments of natural theology. Just as science itself brings together different explanations to help us see the bigger picture (McGrath 2018), there is a need to bring together different disciplines that would complement one other in our attempt to gain a fuller understanding of reality. In response to radical postmodernist objections related to paradigm-shift and the realism-antirealism debate, it is shown that there are various things we can know about reality based on the laws of logic, the construction of sound arguments, probabilistic reasoning (without requiring 100% certainty), evidence from empirical observations, etc. and that the use of arguments and evidence is compatible with the nature of faith. The Classical Approach does not require that people know the evidences first before they can believe; rather, it merely affirms that if someone wishes to find out more about whether belief in God is reasonable, there are evidences which can be sought to show that it is.
