Apologetics to the Glory of God

Category: RazorsKiss

  • Mouw and Mormonism

    The headline says it all, “My Take: This evangelical says Mormonism isn’t a cult.” Richard Mouw, President of Fuller Theological Seminary, continues his campaign to help Mormonism “mainstream” and, in the process, to throw every one of those who have worked so diligently to bring the gospel to the Mormon people under the bus. Mouw’s confusion on Mormonism, rooted not only in his personal theological liberalism, but in his friendships with leading LDS personalities (on the more liberal or left side of the spectrum of Mormonism, to be sure), was put on display years ago when he “apologized” to

  • On Speaking to Brick Walls

    Paul Baird responded. He still doesn’t get it. (Surprise, suprise.)

    I wonder when they are going to learn that it takes an argument to respond to an argument?

    Paul asks “Where’s the beef?” – Which, of course, leads me immediately to ask “Would you know it if you saw it?” He addresses nothing whatsoever that I said. Nothing at all. Further, if he wants to know why I turned the comments off, he can look at our site rules to find out.

    Here is his assertion. “It seems to me that the Pagan worldview I put up stands undefeated …

  • Why Shouldn’t Paul Baird Choose Hats?

    Paul Baird has given us his opinion in the case of the use of worldviews he does not adhere to.

    This is a common complaint ie why argue a worldview that you do not hold ? The answer is the tallest child in the playground argument ie I do not have to be the tallest child in the playground to point out that you are not the tallest child in the playground – I can point out that individual (in this instance it would be a child of equal size).

    Paul’s understanding here doesn’t really deal with the problem being …

  • Adventures in Missing the Antithesis

    Paul Baird recently addressed what he seems to think is the “philosophy that underpins the Christian Presuppositional Apologetics.” He’s wrong, of course, but let us show him why, shall we? He cites Chris’ citation of an argument tucked away in the appendix of PA:S&D as that supposed “underpinning.” Interestingly, he goes on to ask why “do Presuppositional Apologists not start with this explanation that PA is about establishing the need for a unique self sufficient knower and identifying that self sufficient knower exclusively as the Christian god?” Well, that is readily apparent – because we don’t believe that to be …

  • So, You Think You're a Presuppositionalist?

    There are a significant number of newly “converted” (to presup, at least) folks that are quite zealous for the defense of the faith. This, I consider good. On the other hand, Scripture warns us against “zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge”, in Rom 10:2. This is especially important for us to consider. All too often, we have a tendency to “jump right in,” whether we are prepared to do so, or not. Zealousness leads us, with inadequate preparation, all too often to imbalance, and from or along with imbalance, to a sub-Biblical defense. Additionally, there is the …

  • The Unfortunate Case of the Missing Argument

    I’m not going to link all of Paul’s posts in this – they’ve been linked ad nauseum from here, already. His blog is Patient and Persistent – I trust our readers are more than capable of finding these comments of his 🙂

    There are times when I’m engaged in an exchange with someone and I’m not sure if I’ve understood them correctly. That’s how I felt reading Chris Bolt’s stuff. It turns out that I did understand him correctly.

    Note: Paul does not here explain 1) What he understood correctly, or 2) How it is the case that he understood …

  • In Antithesis, Vol 1, No. 1 is now here!

    Included in this issue:

    An Introduction, by Chris Bolt
    The Doctrine of God in Reformed Apologetics, by Joshua Whipps
    Problems with Classic Proofs for the Existence of God, by Chris Bolt
    Autonomy is Hard Work: Human Autonomy as a Rejection of Christian Theism, by Ben Woodring
    Exposition of Romans 1:16-2:16 – The Knowledge of God, by Joshua Whipps

    We hope you enjoy reading it, and are both exhorted and encouraged thereby.

    (A big thanks to Brian Knapp for his yeoman’s work in getting this issue out for you all!)…

  • A Feminist examines Presup

    The post I’m about to respond to came in on my google alerts today. It was so packed with common objections and misconceptions that I decided to answer.

    Evidentialism v. Presuppositionalism
    I have noticed a worrying trend among some Christians. It is the turn away from evidentialist apologetics toward presuppositionalist apologetics.

    Let’s start our presuppositional examination right here. From the get-go, presup is a “worrying” trend. Second, the author is apparently unaware of the link between Sola Scriptura and Covenantal apologetics. As I have said quite often on this blog, and in our chat channel, Covenantal apologetics is Sola Scriptura …

  • Doubt, Unbelief and Antithesis

    For some reason, doubt is seen by many to be a positive thing.  There is not a single hint of any such principle in Scripture, of course, but it remains the case that there is some idea in popular thinking that God encourages doubt.  I was informed the other day that “doubt leads to questions, questions lead to truth.”  I’m sorry, but that is absurd.  What is another name for doubt?  Unbelief.  Please feel free to stop by the channel if you choose to energetically disagree with that assessment, incidentally. I’d be more than happy to discuss it. Believe me. …

  • All Hail Cosmic Broccoli!

    Let’s talk about ignorance. The sort that makes you drop your jaw and stare. I really couldn’t care less about the opening line; it’s the things that he says are “not in the Bible” that are amazingly bad. If what he says weren’t reposted so often by atheists, it might even be hilarious; akin to Silverman’s infamous “Bear Theism” performance he gave during the closing statement of his debate with James White in August of last year.

    The next time believers tell you that ‘separation of church and state’ does not appear in our founding document, tell them to stop