Some people think Fristianity is a “Silver Bullet” objection to Covenantal Apologetics. Are they correct?
UPDATE: David Byron has offered clarification in a comment, but I did not want to risk people missing it. Please see his response now included at the bottom of the body of the post.
One of the greatest worries with the Fristianity objection is that it is often defined in conflicting ways. For example Sean Choi writes, “Of course, Fristianity is not an actual worldview or religion, as is, for example, Islam. But no one – certainly not I – is claiming this.” Yet in a footnote Choi cites David Byron of the Van Til List as popularizing Fristianity. …Read more
Michael Butler as quoted by Sean Choi contends, “If Fristianity is otherwise identical to Christianity, the only way for us to know [that its god is a quadrinity] would be for the Fristian god to reveal this to us.” Choi takes this proposition to be false and explains why.
… Read more
That the Fristian God is a quadrinity is something we know to be true in virtue of stipulation… (Indeed, that is how Butler himself introduced the concept of Fristianity.) Butler is suggesting that there is mystery here when there is none. “Fristianity” has come to mean what it does precisely because
Dr. Oliphint’s new book, Covenantal Apologetics, just hit Kindle only a few hours ago. Many have already balked at the mere suggestion of a “covenantal” apologetic, for various reasons, and the first chapter of the book explains the change in terminology, and I’m sure many are wondering if he’s successfully justified his “new” position.…Read more
Fristianity, as I’m sure you all know, is a hypothetical, or stipulated worldview which putatively provides the same “account” for all things whatsoever despite the addition of “just one thing” to the worldview. In other words, it is, in the words of Choi, “otherwise identical” to Christianity. In this post it might be apropos to note that there is a variety of “flavors” to “the” Fristianity objection. Sometimes, within the same objection, there are multiple “flavors”, sometimes contradictory flavors, offered simultaneously. The continuing discussions on our facebook page and in our comments illustrate this point rather clearly. Both Chris …Read more
… Read more
From this attribute of God, he has one of his names, “Shaddai”, which signifies, who is sufficient, or all-sufficient; of which see Chapter 3. Three things may be observed under this attribute.
1. That God is a self-sufficient Being, and needs not anything from without himself to support himself, or to make himself happy. He is the “first” of Beings, the first and the last; before him there was no God formed, nor will be any after him; from everlasting to everlasting he is God; and therefore his existence is not owing to any; nor has he received any assistance
Ben Askins commented on a podcast done by RazorsKiss about Fristianity styled counters. I’m going to post my own responses here, and work out some of the ways we think about these kinds of objections.
“The Fristianity objection is calculated to consider the assertion of the Trinity as the resolution of the “one-and-many problem,” in consideration of the strong modal claim in Greg Bahnsen’s formulation of a transcendental argument (i.e. “God is the *necessary* precondition for X” where X is some moral, metaphysical or epistemic given.).
So step  with respect to Fristianity would require presenting reasons why a trinitarian …Read more
Jeff Downs posted in regard to J. Warner Wallace’s comments in response to a review found on The Gospel Coalition, authored by Gustav Pritchard. He doesn’t supply the link to the review in his post, but it was easily found by a text search. Once I read the response, I went to the “Cold Case Christianity” facebook page and asked a question of Mr. Wallace. First, let’s take his comments in.
… Read more
I authored a book, Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels, which takes an evidential approach to Christian Case Making (apologetics). That shouldn’t come
Happy Birthday Choosing Hats!
If I am going to post anything resembling an attempt to “toot my own horn” I might as well get it done early so that people will forget about it by the time I write on more significant contributing factors to the recent rise of covenantal apologetics.
Choosing Hats was founded by Brian Knapp and Chris Bolt in July of 2008 in an effort to promote Van Tilian presuppositional apologetics at an introductory level and free of charge on the Internet. Choosing Hats is four years old today, and the next issue of the In Antithesis…Read more
In my preparations for the debate on Sunday, and in dealing with the quite providential example Paul Copan gave us last week of the importance of the subject, I felt it might be valuable to give a few impressions I’ve had along the way. My opening statement has been written for a week or so now – prior to Dr. Copan’s comments, in fact – and my first thought after reading it was this. I wouldn’t change anything I had to say. First, because Dr. Copan’s comments weren’t anything we hadn’t seen before. Second, because I’m giving a positive presentation …Read more