Category: Objections and Misconceptions
-
Oliphint on Covenantal Apologetics and the Doctrine of Scripture
Can be found at TGC, here.…
-
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…
-
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
-
Jingle Bells and the Money Man
We had a fabled metaphysical subjectivist in channel recently. They are quite fascinating. He took the time (quite wastefully) to object to our conception of God, express his moral outrage at the conception of God as judge over creatures, et al. It was quite an interesting exercise in utter confusion.
It reminded me of some things one of my children used to do. My now 11 year old used to have an imaginary friend with the festive name of “Jingle Bells.” Along with all the usual hijinks a young man has with an imaginary friend, they were quite regular chess …
-
Van Til’s Argument Part II
In our last post, we dealt with the claims made over at The Gospel Coalition Blog that Van Til did not make an argument while setting forth his methodology. “Roberto G” made that claim, and we dealt with that sufficiently for the time being. Now, we will deal with Doug Perry’s assertion that Van Til’s “legacy” has “given us the school [of] circular reasoning held by most presuppositionalists”. His sentence is rather garbled, and none too clear, but it seems to be saying that transcendental argumentation is circular, as far as I can tell. Now, even if this isn’t precisely …
-
Van Til’s Argument Part I
In the comment section of Justin Taylor’s post, we have already seen perhaps the most common claims made by opponents of the covenantal apologetic. By “Roberto G”, we have the claim that Van Til didn’t make an argument; and by Doug Perry, we have the claim that the argument is circular. To head off any claims that I misunderstand what they have to say, let me quote the two gentlemen in question on the specified topics, and then I’ll deal with their comments as a whole in later posts, as I’ve decided to make this a short series, to …
-
Tawhid vs. Trinity
Tony Costa vs. Habib Ali – June 11, 2009
Also, there is this post: Trinity vs. Tawheed
As well as this debate:
Samuel Green vs. Abdullah Kunde
Islam v Christianity Debate: Tawheed vs Trinity by NahdaProductions… -
Since I was speaking of the Philosophy of Science
-
God with Us: Divine Condescension and the Attributes of God
Dr. Scott Oliphint, the professor of apologetics and systematic theology at Westminster Seminary, Philadelphia, has come out with a new work on Theology Proper. I have benefited greatly from him in Reasons for Faith, and his lectures on the Doctrine of God on iTunesU (as quickly paced as they were). I am looking forward to finally sitting down, and reading through his approach to Theology Proper, primarily focusing on The Son of God “as both the quintessential revelation of God’s character and the explanation of how he relates to us.” Can’t wait for my copy of God with Us: …