Apologetics to the Glory of God

Tag: common objections

  • Calvin and Thomas

    Our wisdom, in so far as it ought to be deemed true and solid Wisdom, consists almost entirely of two parts: the knowledge of God and of ourselves. But as these are connected together by many ties, it is not easy to determine which of the two precedes and gives birth to the other. For, in the first place, no man can survey himself without forthwith turning his thoughts towards the God in whom he lives and moves; because it is perfectly obvious, that the endowments which we possess cannot possibly be from ourselves; nay, that our very being is

    …

  • Christ is Lord of philosophy too.

    Skepticism is a philosophical illustration of the foolishness of unbelief described in Scripture.…

  • Christianity Hinders Scientific Progress

    It’s truly a tired mantra. Under the pretense that they own a corner on the Market of Reality while ignoring the fact that they are merely presuming upon the efforts of their relatively recent philosophical parents (many of whose principles are derived from the truths of Christianity), the New Atheists, evangelizing from their Holy Bible of Naturalistic Science and Witless Retorts written by their own venerated prophets, proclaim loudly and often, “Christianity hinders scientific progress.” And of course, as is commonly the hazard of religious discourse, there’s a good bit of nuance to hack through.

    First, what is meant by …

  • Overly Pious Apologetic Practitioners

    Often people argue that conversions do not come about through argument. The idea is that faith in the Gospel alone is what saves. We cannot argue anyone into the kingdom. So we should just preach the Gospel.

    The suggestion is superficially insightful. It sounds pious to preach the Gospel. And it is. But imagine preaching the Gospel to those who vocally reject its most basic tenets. Once the Gospel has been preached, and the unbeliever persists in his or her statements to the effect that God does not exist, sin is a psychological trick to get children to behave, Jesus …

  • Models, Frameworks, Circularity, and Blind Faith

    Introduction

    A number of my debate opponents have spoken of “models” or “frameworks.” A model or framework is posited as the basis of knowledge.

    For example, one model or framework claims that we may only come to know things through evidence available to the five senses. But the claim that we may only come to know things through evidence available to the five senses is not itself accepted upon the basis of evidence available to the five senses!

    Assumption

    Some will respond that a model or framework does not have to follow its own rules. A model or framework is …

  • The Consistently Inconsistent Worldview Objection

    Suppose someone posits that his or her worldview is consistently inconsistent. He or she admits that there are many inconsistencies within the worldview. In this case, inconsistency is not something to be shunned. Inconsistency is to be affirmed. Embraced. Granted approval. Are there such worldviews? Yes. There are worldviews that come close to rejecting the need for consistency. Buddhism and postmodernism are two examples. How might the covenantal apologist respond?

    First, an inconsistency-affirming worldview is also consistency-affirming. There is nothing more inconsistent with inconsistency than consistency. To be consistent, an inconsistency-affirming worldview must also be a consistency-affirming worldview. …

  • A Christian Epistemology of Testimony

    Epistemology of Testimony

    In the Word of God we have the testimony of God. We accept this testimony on faith. We are warranted in doing so. One might say that we have a testimonial epistemology.

    Doubting Scripture

    Unbelievers often call the aforementioned testimonial epistemology into question. They question our accepting the Word of God on faith. They question the notion that we have the Word of God.

    Frequently the aforementioned doubts stem from other testimony. So for example, a young person reads that naturalistic, macro-evolutionary biology is true and that he would be stupid or wicked for not accepting …

  • Imputation Attested in the Early, Medieval, and even Counter-Reformation Era

    http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2012/11/imputation-attested-by-in-early.html…

  • Sola Scriptura and the Canon Revisited: Guest Post by Adam Blauser

    As I have gotten involved in dealing with Roman Catholicism and sola scriptura, I have found two things very interesting. First of all, there is a grossly simplistic view of meaning in language amongst many Roman Catholic apologists. Many of them will be willing to destroy human language in order to argue against sola scriptura, borrowing from men like Jacques Derrida and Stanley Fish to argue that we cannot know which interpretation of scripture is correct. It is amazing to be able to cite deconstructionists making parallel arguments to Roman Catholic apologists.

    Second, what I am realizing more and more …

  • A Response to Jeremiah Bannister (paleocrat)

    I will be responding to this post  – http://jeremiahbannister.com/?p=154 – which is written in response to my post here – https://choosinghats.org/2012/11/canon-and-roman-catholicism.

    Justin Scheiber of Reasonable Doubts recently linked to one of my posts on the canon of Scripture. I do not really have a way of following Justin, although I did notice an announcement that he is available for speaking engagements and debates. Perhaps one day he will debate me, but I am not holding my breath. In any event, Justin linked to me, and Jeremiah Bannister followed that link. Bannister is better known as “paleocrat.”

    Some of you …