Category: Authors
-
Reasonable Doubts About Non-Christian Excuses
The most recent podcasts, and hence comments, at Reasonable Doubts are focused upon presuppositional apologetics. The gentlemen at the aforementioned site are apparently impressed by the comment of one Andrew EC:
…- Andrew EC says:
It seems to me that the fundamental weaknesses of the presuppositionalist position are as follows:
1. There’s no analysis as to what it means to give “an account” of something. Philosophically, something only counts as an explanation if it is what Kant would call an analytic statement; that is, a proposition whose conclusion is not contained within its predicate.
-
A Breath from Heaven on Dry Bones
…It is upon a field of the dead that the Sun of righteousness has risen, and the shouts that announce His advent fall on deaf ears: yea, even though the morning stars should again sing for joy and the air be palpitant with the echo of the great proclamation, their voice could not penetrate the ears of the dead. As we sweep our eyes over the world lying in its wickedness, it is the valley of the prophet’s vision which we see before us: a valley that is filled with bones, and lo! they are very dry. What benefit is
-
Oliphint on Covenantal Apologetics and the Doctrine of Scripture
Can be found at TGC, here.…
-
Some Thoughts About the Impossibility of the Contrary
…Introduction
The “Transcendental Argument for God” (TAG) is typically understood as resting upon the “Impossibility of the Contrary.” We may be in a better position apologetically if we think about the Impossibility of the Contrary (IoC) in terms of three aspects of the IoC. These three aspects of the IoC are definition, dogma, and demonstration.
Definition
What is the IoC?
“Impossibility” refers to the impossibility of predication upon the presuppositions of some position. We might also take the impossibility in view to refer to the impossibility of the truth of some position, the impossibility of the rationality
-
Reasonable Doubts About Overload Objections
…Keith says:
Great podcast, guys.
One possible approach to presuppositionalism is to make your own, conflicting presupposition using your own invented God.
Imagine how taken aback a presuppositionalist would be in a debate if you said the following:
“I have a confession to make: I am not an atheist. I believe in the god Drusba*. And he inspired me to write down his only gospel. This gospel says that everyone knows deep down inside who Drusba is, and that no understanding of the world is possible without him. Drusba is the giver of
-
Reasonable Doubts About Atheist Counter-Apologetics
…kantalope says:
You will probably cover this in the next podcast – but the things that occurred to me while listening:
I am no Bible scholar but I don’t recall any big discussion of logic principles in the sermon on the mount or anywhere for that matter. So how come the big logic scholars were Greek and worshipped a whole nother set of gods? Seems like the supposition we should arrive at is that things are comprehensible because of Zeus and the titans and not the Hebrew god.
And the point of the
-
Praxis Presup: Episode 19
Chris begins his critique of the counter-apologetics podcast Reasonable Doubts as it addresses presuppositional apologetics.
The counter-apologetics podcast may be found here – http://freethoughtblogs.com/reasonabledoubts/2012/02/09/episode-97-presuppositional-apologetics-part-1
An initial comment on the podcast may be found here – https://choosinghats.org/2012/02/reasonable-doubts-about-presuppositional-apologetics…
-
Reasonable Doubts About Presuppositional Apologetics
Paul Baird was kind enough to point me toward a comment he made here – http://freethoughtblogs.com/reasonabledoubts/2012/02/09/episode-97-presuppositional-apologetics-part-1/#comment-6876 – on the Reasonable Doubts site. The podcast on that page pertains to presuppositional apologetics. The first episode on the topic attempts to summarize the method and the next podcast will critique it. My time is very limited but I did offer some thoughts in a comment:
…“If you do want to interact with a ‘sane’ Presuppositionalist then I’d recommend Chris Bolt of Choosinghats.com”
They can start with this 6 part series critiquing Justin Scheiber who is one of the hosts on the program
-
Theology Determines Apologetic: Van Til
…“All Protestants will agree with one another that the doctrines of Protestantism must be defended as over against Romanism. But not all agree that there is a distinctly Protestant method of defending Christianity as a whole. Some hold that Protestants should first join the Romanists in order with them to defend the doctrines that they have in common. All Christians, we are told, believe in God. All believe that God has created the world. All Christians hold that God controls the world by His providence. All believe in the deity of Christ. These and other doctrines may therefore be defended