Apologetics to the Glory of God

Category: Authors

  • The Covenant of Works

    I don’t have any homework for you before this one. I would, however, invite you to think, very carefully, about what the nature of Adam’s headship would be, if this doctrine was denied – and what covenant that man could be said to be breaking. There are, of course, many implications to be found here – but I’ll leave you to ponder them for yourself.

    …

  • Van Til on Systematic and Covenant Theology

    “We have already indicated that the best apologetic defense will invariably be made by him who knows the system of truth of Scripture best. The fight between Christianity and non-Christianity is, in modern times, no piece-meal affair. It is the life-and-death struggle between two mutually opposed life-and-world views.”

    “It is a God-given duty that we should take the content of Scripture and bring it together in a systematic whole. It is plain that we are required to know the revelation that God has given us. Yet we would not adequately know that revelation if we knew it only in its …

  • To TAG or Not To TAG?

    How strongly did Van Til feel about using TAG when arguing for God?

    Now the only argument for an absolute God that holds water is a transcendental argument.

    Quite strongly. It’s not that there aren’t other arguments – they just don’t hold any water when arguing for the kind of God revealed in the Bible – an absolute God. If we are totally dependent upon God (as is the case if God is absolute), then we are necessarily dependent upon God as our starting point in reasoning. If we aim to show that this kind of God exists, we must …

  • Our Covenant Keeping God

    Before you listen to the sermon I have linked below, I want you to do something for me. First, read Psalm 36. Second, read Romans 1-3. (As a bonus, throw in 4 and 5 – you might catch why I said that in the sermon.) Third, read the first chapter of Calvin’s Institutes. Fourth, ponder what implications the universal knowledge of God, the universal knowledge of His moral law, and the status of man as covenant-breaker, under Adam, his federal head, might have insofar as what Van Til’s usage of those concepts was, and what theology they presuppose. Please take …

  • An Exhortation

    Once upon a time, long ago, there was a fervent young man with a burning desire to defend his faith. He mixed it up on BBSs, wrote blog posts, went on forums, and even set up networks, and a “blog carnival” (for those of you who might remember that phenomenon). He had books by Lewis, McDowell, Craig, Habermas, Licona, and the like. Then, he ran into a problem. A Roman Catholic apologist wanted to join his apologetic blog carnival – his father was a Roman Catholic, and he knew just enough to know that wasn’t kosher – but he wasn’t …

  • An Overview of the 1689 London Baptist Confession

    Now, I’m well aware that not all of you are Reformed Baptists. I’m also aware that not all of our readers are confessional. I won’t press the Reformed Baptist distinctives, but you should, however, be confessional. As Dr. James Renihan says in this lecture; “Before you ask the question ‘what should I do’ – ask the question, ‘what do I believe?’” Reformed Baptist or not, confessional or not, this is a valuable lecture – and hopefully, it will explain, far better than I could, the importance of confessionalism in a consistent, Scriptural faith – and by extension, in your apologetic …

  • Dr Scott Oliphint Fields Questions on Unbelievable?

    That’s right, it was an inquisition! Ok, not quite that bad. Dr. Oliphint was on Unbelievable? to talk about Presuppositional/Covenantal Apologetics. He ended up having to spend the entire time defending it from Kurt Jaros who clearly doesn’t understand the Theological underpinnings of the method, or their implications. However, because of this, there are some very good explanations that Dr. Oliphint gives that I think are very helpful. One that stands out in my mind is confusion between the fact that non believers are irrational yet we can also reason with them. Listen carefully for these great answers Dr. Oliphint …

  • Rebranding Apologetics

    With the name change, there will be particular hang ups with some who use the methodology to defend the faith. A good example is Fred Butler, a respectable guy who graduated from TMS and  advocates presuppositional apologetics. He says :

     

    It is unnecessary because I believe the word “presuppositionalism” is an appropriate descriptor for the methodology. When we engage unbelievers, we are engaging the presuppositions of their worldview — the foundational building blocks of those “strongholds” they have built against the knowledge of God (2 Cor. 10:4-5).  And moreover, we stand our ground on the presuppositions that we are

    …

  • Behold, “Presuppositional” is passing way, apologetics is becoming “Covenantal”

    Dr. Oliphint explains why he finds the label “Presuppositional” to be unhelpful, and why he is instead labeling Van Til’s methodology “Covenantal apologetics”.

    Covenantal Apologetics from Westminster Theological Seminary on Vimeo.

    The book is due for next month! For anyone interested in learning Van Til’s apologetic, one should certainly check the work that Oliphint has undertaken to biblically demonstrate  Van Til’s particular Reformed apologetic application.…

  • Van Til on the New Evangelicalism

    I heard this the other day… it was dynamite. I hadn’t listened to it in a couple years. Check it out.

    …