We make our gods unknowable entities. The God of the Bible is knowable. Throughout all of Scripture God never presumes Himself to be unknown or unknowable but rather known. The Bible contains no proofs in the strictest sense for the existence of God. The Bible starts out with a declaration that God exists and assumes His existence throughout. The sinful fool knows that God exists but holds the truth down in unrighteousness saying in his heart, “There is no God.” (Romans 1.18ff; Psalm 14.1)
The individual who fashions for himself an unknowable god makes an idol that is wholly irrelevant …Read more
Paul Manata has written another one of his excellent reviews. Though I have already read the book, I have been hoping that he would review Michael Sudduth’s The Reformed Objection to Natural Theology and Manata has not disappointed. The book is rather expensive and has much to say that many of those who object to Natural Theology are not going to want to hear. Thus I do not look forward to many people reading the work even though they should. In light of this the review is especially helpful. You may find it here.
A few quick comments –…Read more
James White and Sam Shamoun discuss whether Muhammad is seen in the New Testament, as many Muslims assert. You can watch here. Also includes a run-down of Dr. White’s recent debate with Sheik Awal.…Read more
James White and Sam Shamoun discuss the distinctions between Trinity and Tawheed, and the apologetic implications of those distinctions.
You can watch it here.…Read more
… Read more
In taking Scripture as an absolute presupposition and standard for thought, the Christian apologist ought to maintain that there are no possibilities outside of what God is and decrees to be. It is never possible for God to be other than the type of being He is portrayed to be in His self-revelation. Because he does not presuppose the certain truth of the Bible at the very start of his apologetic (de facto and in principium) Clark (a self-professed Calvinist) is willing to reduce the whole system of Christian truth revealed by God therein to a possible accident
… Read more
Since neutrality is unattainable for either the unbeliever or believer, and since they have conflicting ultimate standards for judging claims to knowledge, the task of apologetics will ultimately be carried on at a presuppositional level. Contrasting worldviews are being debated. Each worldview has its presuppositions about reality, knowledge, and ethics; these mutually influence and support each other. There are no facts or uses of reason which are available outside of the interpretive system of basic commitments or assumptions which appeals to them; the presuppositions used by Christian and non-Christian determine what they will accept as factual and reasonable, and their
And when he returned to Capernaum after some days, it was reported that he was at home. And many were gathered together, so that there was no more room, not even at the door. And he was preaching the word to them. And they came, bringing to him a paralytic carried by four men. And when they could not get near him because of the crowd, they removed the roof above him, and when they had made an opening, they let down the bed on which the paralytic lay. And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the …Read more
Please note that this post is not a part of my current debate with Nocterro.
Excited? I am not.
The title of Nocterro’s most recent post at Urban Philosophy is A Conversion. The title is puzzling. In what way has Nocterro experienced a “conversion”? One thing is for certain; he is no Christian. Nocterro has merely changed his position on the matter of the existence of “God”. He now professes to be a theist.
Not only is “conversion” not being used in a Christian sense here but neither is “God”. One learns quickly that what Nocterro has in view …Read more
What we believe drives what we’re defending, obviously. When someone defending another position that claims to be Christian interacts with us, how are we to respond? Many times, that will tell unbelievers as much about us as our interaction with them does. Wes Widner, featured recently due to his citation of Open Theist Gregory Boyd, has criticized Dr. James White in the recent past, quite vehemently.
Most notably for: “misrepresenting and slandering” William Lane Craig, Norm Geisler, etc.
When pressed to give examples on The Dividing Line, Wes was unable to give any concrete examples. In other conversations since, Wes …Read more