Apologetics to the Glory of God

Tag: clbolt

  • Opening Statement from my debate with Michael Long

    My debate with Michael Long may be found here – https://choosinghats.org/2011/08/is-there-good-reason-to-believe-that-the-christian-god-exists

    See some of my debate preparation here – https://choosinghats.org/2012/03/behind-the-scenes-notes-from-my-debate-with-michael-long

    Debate Opening Statement

    I. Introduction

    Thank you Mr. Knapp, Mr. Long, my wife Kerri. Most of all I thank the Triune God of Scripture who chose, redeemed, and sealed me concerning the Gospel through which I am being saved by grace through faith; that Christ died for our sins, that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. (1 Corinthians 15:1-5) I have personally experienced the reality of forgiveness of my sins …

  • “Reason Rally” Report

    http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2012/03/outreach-report-reason-rally-2012_28.html

  • Two New Apologetics Books

    First, Jamin Hubner has released the Second Edition of his The Portable Presuppositionalist.

    Second, Clifford B. McManis has published Biblical Apologetics: Advancing and Defending the Gospel of Christ. Several people have let me know about this book prior to its release, so I excitedly read everything I could in its online preview. I have some initial concerns with respect to the rhetoric and tone of the work.

    McManis makes rather large implicit promises about putting a different spin on apologetics, but the portion of the book that I read contains very little, if anything, “new.” Of course McManis …

  • Stop Answering Us!

    It’s the strangest thing…

    Podcast after podcast has been devoted to the alleged refutation of Van Tilian covenantal apologetic arguments over the last year or so. Since I am a contributor here, and since the site is “dedicated to the explanation and demonstration of presuppositional apologetics in defense of the Christian faith to the glory of God,” I have tried to respond to such podcasts when I am able to do so. The same holds true with respect to blog posts. Scripture teaches that non-Christians have no apologetic, or defense, of their position. I believe that, and hence when I …

  • Behind the Scenes: Notes from my debate with Michael Long

    Some readers might be interested in seeing the very beginning of preparation for my debate with Michael Long (found here – https://choosinghats.org/2011/08/is-there-good-reason-to-believe-that-the-christian-god-exists). What is posted below is by no means the entirety of my notes for the debate but does provide an idea of how I initially go about preparing for a debate. The quotations are from the Goodness Over God podcast and are as close as I could get them to the originals which may be found here – http://goodnessovergod.blogspot.com. Each quote is followed by a time stamp and episode number.

    Michael Long is a philosopher and …

  • Acts 17 and Covenantal Apologetics

    Re-posted from here – http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2012/03/13/answering-objections-to-presuppositionalism.

     

    J.R.

    March 14, 2012 at 12:51 PM

    taco,
    Non-presuppositionalists argue that Acts 17 is clearly a classical (specifically Greek) apologetic used by Paul. You’ll need to find another example to make your case. “So Paul, standing in the midst of Areopagus, said: “Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religiou. For as I passed and observed the objects of your worship, I found an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you.”

    Reply
    •  taco
      March 14, 2012

  • Modified Common Consent Argument

    One of my favorite, fun little arguments for the existence of God is formulated by Roman Catholic apologist Peter Kreeft and is called, “The Common Consent Argument.” You may read the argument here – http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existence.htm#19. Kreeft states the argument as follows:

    1. Belief in God—that Being to whom reverence and worship are properly due—is common to almost all people of every era.
    2. Either the vast majority of people have been wrong about this most profound element of their lives or they have not.
    3. It is most plausible to believe that they have not.
    4. Therefore it is most plausible to believe

  • Paul Jenkins, Naughty Children, and Hell

    Introduction

    Somewhat understandably, our friend Paul Jenkins categorizes the discussion of, “whether Hell is ‘eternal conscious punishment’ on the one hand, or ‘annihilation’ on the other” as, “Not just piffle, but risible piffle.”

    The alternative that occurs most obviously to me is, “Hell doesn’t exist — it’s a horror story told to children to stop them being naughty.”

    One might question how Paul is so dogmatically certain that hell doesn’t exist. Of course it does not matter how certain Paul feels he is with regard to the alleged non-existence of hell if hell does in fact exist. It does …

  • Atheist Justin Scheiber on Bible Translation

    After highlighting a difference between the way the NRSV, ESV, NASB, KJB, and WEB translate a particular text of Scripture versus the way the NIV, NLT, and God’s Word “translate” it (This is according to the Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, but note that the second list of versions provided are not all translations. Some are paraphrases, and it can make a difference to this particular objection, but for the sake of brevity I will move on.) Justin Scheiber of Reasonable Doubts writes:

    

I should perhaps presume that the ‘real’ Christians have their ducks all in a row – that

  • Atheist Andrew’s Misreading of Exodus 21:20-21 On Beating Slaves

    A visiting atheist fanboy of Richard Dawkins named Andrew wrote:

    Oh dear – have you not actually read the bible? It clearly says you can beat your slave to death as long as they take longer than three days to die.

    Rather than addressing some difficult questions posed to him by Rhology, Andrew jumps immediately into a passage that is typically touted by Internet atheists who want to pretend as though they know the Bible better than most believers by virtue of their having read, say, the Skeptics Bible or visited Evil Bible. Now let’s address Andrew’s misreading of …