Apologetics to the Glory of God

Search results for: “"transcendental argument"”

  • Apologetic Mirror Objection

    David Byron recently commented on this post which concerns TAG and Islam. Rather than letting a rather lengthy comment linger on an old post I have decided to post it here in full. Part of being a good apologist is being aware of common objections to one’s methodology and arguments. This leads to further study and a stronger apologetic. It also equips the apologist to be able to at the very least recognize a particular objection in the context of an apologetic encounter. Byron writes out a helpful description of what has elsewhere been labeled the Apologetic Mirror Problem (AMP). …

  • Ben Wallis responds to “induction again” (Updated)

    Ben Wallis has responded to the post found here.

    Chris,

    You offer several quotations from me on induction, and suggest that they are contradictory. But how? What contradiction exactly do you see? Because I confess, I cannot find any. Perhaps you think that having something new to say about induction constitutes a change in view…? I hope that’s not the case. It just means that I’m trying to find more effective ways to communicate the point, and raising other points which might bear on it. After all, there are different problems on the table, here, and they all demand

  • An Informal Introduction to Covenantal Apologetics: Part 15 – Illustrating necessity by the impossibility of the contrary.

    By C.L. Bolt

    We’ve said some important things concerning the sufficiency of the Christian worldview and the nature of the transcendental. Let’s set aside these previous discussions for now and focus on demonstrating the necessity of the Christian worldview by virtue of the impossibility of the contrary. You will recall our much earlier discussion of the impossibility of the contrary in Part 12.

    In the context of transcendental arguments one need not speak of competing transcendentals (plural) but only of a competing transcendental (singular). If one is to demonstrate that some given condition is necessary then one need only to …

  • An Informal Introduction to Covenantal Apologetics: Part 14 – Nature of the transcendental.

    By C.L. Bolt

    We spoke before of beliefs that are preconditions for intelligible experience; transcendental beliefs. A set of transcendental beliefs constitute what we might call the transcendental conceptual scheme. If there were some view of the world that were completely “other” with respect to our own then we would be unable to comprehend it as a competitor. When no comparison can be made between two different schemes the two schemes are not recognizable by their respective adherents. The foreign scheme would simply not mate with our own. If we were unable to understand such an allegedly competing transcendental then …

  • An Informal Introduction to Covenantal Apologetics: Part 13 – Sufficiency of the Christian worldview.

    By C.L. Bolt

    It has been emphasized that there are ultimately only two worldviews though there are of course disagreements within the non-Christian worldview resulting in various manifestations of the non-Christian position. Here we focus briefly upon the Christian worldview and will in the following part of this introduction explain how it relates to transcendental argumentation and in particular the nature of a transcendental view.

    The Christian believes that God has revealed Himself in His creation. We are created in the image of God, and Scripture is His special revelation to us. God has gifted us with the faculties of …

  • An Informal Introduction to Covenantal Apologetics: Part 9 – Standards of presuppositions.

    By C.L. Bolt

    The apparent implication of some of what we have said is that there is some sort of relativism with respect to objective arguments. Whether or not arguments have true premises, are valid, etc. appears to be completely dependent upon one’s worldview. But the Christian will want to reject this relativism! Of course, we are not proposing that the unbeliever is right to view things as she does, and there is objective truth. But it must be understood very clearly that when we are speaking to people we are dealing with entire worldviews and presuppositions that are completely …

  • ZaoThanatoo Answers the Argument from Horrific Suffering (Guest Post)

    Argument from Horrific Suffering

    The Argument from Horrific Suffering for the Non-Existence of God (Mitch) / Answering the Argument from Horrific Suffering (Chris) / Bolt and Horrific Suffering (Mitch) / Answering the Argument from Horrific Suffering 2 (Chris) / Bolt and Horrific Suffering II (Mitch) / Answering the Argument from Horrific Suffering 3 (Chris) / Bolt and Horrific Suffering III (Mitch).

    Chris Bolt and Mitch Leblanc have been carrying on a discussion surrounding J. L. Schellenberg’s Antitheistic Argument from Horrors.  The full exchange (to date) is linked here.  As I’m occasionally wont, I’d like to throw my hat …

  • On Using Logic In Apologetics

    As I have noted before, every once in a while it is necessary to make plain one’s disagreement with even those closest to oneself in terms of thought for the sake of clarity and development of a topic. I have received a number of questions and comments concerning a recent post by Jamin Hubner called Lessons in Logic and Argumentation: Propositional and Symbolic Logic and Their Place in Apologetics. Since there are some points in the post that pertain to future posts I’d like to write on TAG and since the post essentially would lump me together with skeptics …

  • Is Fristianity Actual? (Updated with response from David Byron)

    UPDATE: David Byron has offered clarification in a comment, but I did not want to risk people missing it. Please see his response now included at the bottom of the body of the post.

    _______________________________

    One of the greatest worries with the Fristianity objection is that it is often defined in conflicting ways. For example Sean Choi writes, “Of course, Fristianity is not an actual worldview or religion, as is, for example, Islam. But no one – certainly not I – is claiming this.” Yet in a footnote Choi cites David Byron of the Van Til List as popularizing Fristianity. …

  • Presuppositionalist Concept of Presupposition

    Don Collett argues that traditional forms of argument do not do justice to presupposition as a concept. He works from Peter Strawson’s semantic account of presupposition.

    According to Strawson, a statement A may be said to presuppose a statement B if B is a necessary precondition of the truth-or-falsity of A. Strawson’s interpretation of the concept of presupposition has been restated in succinct fashion by Bas van Fraassen as follows:

    A presupposes B if and only if A is neither true nor false unless B is true.

    This may also be stated as follows:

    (1) A presupposes B if