Apologetics to the Glory of God

Category: Common Objections

  • Actual Engagement

    Interestingly enough, a comment made in passing now constitutes “engagement”.

    https://twitter.com/ChoosingHats/status/1291809399917469701

    Now, if this constitutes “engagement” – fine, I’ll buy that. However, it was followed up with this:

    Again, fine. What does this tweet claim, however?

    1) Jesus died (not contested by me).

    2) The wages of sin is *death* (not contested by me)

    3) That death is *not* eternal …

  • Mr. White, Mr. Grey, and Mr. Black X

    When Mr. Black objects against Mr. White that unconditional surrender to the authority of Scripture is irrational, then Mr. Grey nods approval and says that, of course, the “rational man” has a perfect right to test the credibility of Scripture by logic. When the Bible speaks of God’s sovereign election of some men to salvation this must mean something that fits in with his “rational nature.” When Mr. Black objects to Mr. White that unconditional surrender to Scripture is rationalistic, then Mr. Grey again nods approval and says that, of course, genuine human personality has a perfect right to test

    …

  • Calvin’s Commentary on 1 Cor 1:18-21

    For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

    In this first clause a concession is made. For as it might very readily be objected, that the gospel is commonly held in contempt, if it be presented in so bare and abject a form, Paul of his own accord concedes this, but when he adds, that it is so in the estimation of them that perish, he intimates that no regard must be paid to their judgment. For who would choose to despise …

  • The Imperfection of the Saints

    In an exchange on Facebook recently, I encountered a Sinless Perfectionist of some stripe. Facebook being what it is, the back-and-forth was… unsatisfying. Eventually, I promised to exposit some Scriptures that taught progressive sanctification. It’s taken me longer than I wanted to get around to it (and I was rightly chided for my tardiness) – but I wanted to do justice to the subject when I did so. Hopefully, this treatment will be of benefit.

    Progressive Sanctification is the teaching of the Reformation, and all of the Reformation’s children. That being said, Protestantism in general is a much wider tent. …

  • Lex Lutheran and Caleb Keith Discuss Presuppositional Apologetics

    “He who wishes to philosophize by using Aristotle without danger to his soul must first become thoroughly foolish in Christ.” – Martin Luther (29th Thesis, 1518 Heidelberg Disputation)

    Disclaimer: Ben Woodring made me promise to be nice in this post.

    Inerrancy

    On the most recent episode of the newly named Wittenberg Project podcast featuring Caleb Keith from 1517 Legacy and Thinking Fellows, the presuppositional apologetic method is described as making arguments from a presupposition that the Bible is the inerrant word of God.…

  • Why Should I Believe Christianity? by James N. Anderson

    It goes without saying that I’ll recommend pretty much anything written by James N. Anderson of Reformed Theological Seminary in Charlotte, NC.

    Here’s my summary of his most recent book, Why Should I Believe Christianity?, available to members of Books At a Glance.

    (You may also be interested in the summary of A New Kind of Apologist edited by Sean McDowell.)

    Go ahead, sign up for an account! You know you want to.

     …

  • When Possibility is Impossible: Answering a Rawlsian Ruse with Radical Retortion

    In 1971 John Rawls wrote his famous A Theory of Justice in which he presented what is known as ‘The Original Position.’ The OP is a hypothetical state of affairs in which an individual operates from behind a ‘Veil of Ignorance’ in order to establish principles of justice for society apart from considerations of ethnicity, class, gender, and the like. This thought experiment stems from the radical autonomy present in Immanuel Kant’s work.

    Enough about Rawls. Cornelius Van Til was a Christian apologist who likewise drew from Kant’s work, taking the transcendental method developed by Kant (and many others before …

  • Peripatetic 33 – Hypothetical Inception – Spencer Toy’s conversation, but with a real presupper

    What would this conversation look like with a real presupper? Sorta like this.…

  • A Fundamental Problem With A Fundamental Problem with the Presuppositionalism of Cornelius Van Til

    Before anyone gets too excited by Haines’ upcoming critique of Van Til at SES (including Haines himself, I might add), it might be useful to point out a common mistake he has made in discussion of Van Til thus far.

    The philosopher or apologist who is well acquainted with the modern and post-modern philosophy of Immanuel Kant, G. W. F. Hegel, Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger will recognize that Van Til’s system of apologetics is very much dependent upon these sources.

    He notes this in the body of his announcement for his SES talk – but it might be illustrative …

  • Roundtable Discussion: The Gang’s (mostly) Back Together

    A great time was had – and thanks especially to Ben Woodring, aka Book, for getting the almost whole gang back together. Brian, Chris, myself, Resequitur, and brigand all stopped in, and we talked Covenantal Apologetics. Ben asked us some basic questions, we shared some history, and what our motivations and experiences have been over the years. Looking forward to being around for a long time to come, slow posting or not. Enjoy – I sure did!

    …