Apologetics to the Glory of God

Tag: apologetic method

  • A Case Study In Apostasy by ZaoThanatoo (Guest Post)

    I had planned to write a chapter-by-chapter critical review of prominent atheist John Loftus’ book, Why I Am an Atheist; however, upon reading the book I believed that such an analysis was overkill and unnecessary in refuting Loftus’ claims.  Providentially, shortly after I finished reading Loftus’ three books the fellas over at Triablogue released their collaboration, The Infidel Delusion, in response to Loftus, et al.  So I thought my little collection of posts might just be blogospheric white noise in the flurry of responses exchanged.

    So I reworked the bit that I had written in response to Loftus …

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

    In our previous post, we saw the beginnings of the typical evidential/classical method, as posed by Dr. Carnell. We will continue our journey through Van Til’s dialogue, on pages 316-317 of Defense of the Faith.

    Of course, Mr. Black will be greatly impressed with such an argument as Mr. Grey has presented to him for the truth of Christianity. In fact, if Christianity is thus shown to be in accord with the moral nature of man, as Mr. Black himself sees that moral nature, then Mr. Black does not need to be converted at all to accept Christianity. He

  • 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

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

    In the previous post, we saw Cornelius Van Til examining the apologetic method of the Reformed, vs the Evangelical varieties. By Evangelical, he means the Arminian or Roman Catholic schools of theology and/or apologetic. As our friend Dr. White is wont to say, “theology determines apologetic”. We’ll continue this series in this post, the second of the series, and pick up where we left off.

    An excerpt from Defense of The Faith, by Cornelius Van Til – Chap. 12, Sec. 3, pg. 313-315, 4th Ed.

    The Believer Meets the Unbeliever – Part II

    Let us first look briefly at

  • Responses to the assertions of Yasser Ali

    In the debate transcript, I have inserted my opponent’s answers, as I said I would. This post is intended to answer his assertions made therein, and to address the various problems I found with them. As of this posting, he has yet to offer his final questions, so I’m going to go ahead and offer comments on the debate in it’s entirety, and consider the debate closed. My questions will be italicized bold, his answers in italics, both will be in quote, and my responses in plain text. I will be offering more comments in the future, and …

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

    An excerpt from Defense of The Faith, by Cornelius Van Til – Chap. 12, Sec. 3, pg. 312-313, 4th Ed.

    The Believer Meets the Unbeliever

    To see clearly what is meant, think of a dentist. You go to him with a “bad tooth”. Does he take care of your tooth in two operations? To be sure, you may have to come back to have him finish the job. But it is one job he is doing. He takes all the decayed matter out before he fills the cavity. Well, Mr. Black is the man with the toothache, and you,

  • Positive Covenantal Apologetics

    A popular objection to the covenantal apologetic is the claim that it  lacks positive arguments or otherwise falls short of providing a positive apologetic. There are at least three responses to this criticism.

    1. The distinction between a negative and positive apologetic and how the distinction is made is largely attached to apologetic method. Assuming definitions and a distinction that covenantal apologetics by their very nature do not share and then raising an objection to covenantal apologetics based upon the unshared categories of an alternative method is roughly equivalent to critiquing covenantal apologetics because they are covenantal apologetics and not …

  • God Hates Arrogance in Apologetics

    Might we take a moment to set everything aside, read or listen to this message from John Piper, and remember that God hates our arrogance and our pride. God is really not all that concerned about apologetic ministries, letters behind names, popularity, erudition, logical precision or lack thereof as much as many of us would often tend to think. Apologetics is not about you. How foolish we can become in this respect; how often we need a reminder.

    “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.” 2 Corinthians 10.17…

  • Debate Announcement

    On Februrary 5th, I will be debating Roman Catholic Dan Marcum (a Skype debate) on the proposition “Sola Scriptura is an essential Christian doctrine, and necessary for instruction in faith and practice“. My goal is to argue this proposition presuppositionally. I’m planning on a couple of podcasts in the near future to give the audience some preparation, and to ensure my opponent knows where I’m standing, going into the debate, so stay tuned.…

  • Introductory Level Apologetics Books

    In light of the fact that Christmas is almost here and in light of the frequently asked questions I receive regarding introductory level material on covenantal apologetics I have provided a list of introductions to presuppositional apologetics. The list is by no means exhaustive. The books are listed roughly in order starting from the easiest to understand and most foundational.

    The Battle Belongs to the Lord

    Every Thought Captive

    Pushing the Antithesis

    Always Ready

    The Portable Presuppositionalist

    Christian Apologetics