The Atheist’s Guide to Reality

Christian philosophers have been developing and refining arguments for the existence of God since the earliest times, but it’s not often one comes across a convinced atheist making a powerful philosophical case for the existence of God. Yet that’s precisely what we find—quite contrary to the author’s intent—in Alex Rosenberg’s book The Atheist’s Guide to Reality.

Check out this review of Alex Rosenberg’s book The Atheist’s Guide to Reality. Enjoy!…

Read more

William Lane Craig, Evidentialism, & Inerrancy

William Lane Craig answers the question of whether there were guards at Christ’s tomb in an appalling (to any Bible believer) manner:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=b8UMb7NlxkU

TurretinFan’s rebuttal to Craig’s answer:

Rebuttal to Craig’s Denial of the Historicity of the Guard Account

It is disappointing, though unsurprising, to see that when one has abandoned a presuppositional commitment to the truth of Scripture, and to the God of the Bible, that one unavoidably falls further and further into the trap of editing the Gospel to make it more palatable to the ears of unbelievers.

We pray that Craig will turn from his sinful tampering …

Read more

Dr Scott Oliphint Fields Questions on Unbelievable?

That’s right, it was an inquisition! Ok, not quite that bad. Dr. Oliphint was on Unbelievable? to talk about Presuppositional/Covenantal Apologetics. He ended up having to spend the entire time defending it from Kurt Jaros who clearly doesn’t understand the Theological underpinnings of the method, or their implications. However, because of this, there are some very good explanations that Dr. Oliphint gives that I think are very helpful. One that stands out in my mind is confusion between the fact that non believers are irrational yet we can also reason with them. Listen carefully for these great answers Dr. Oliphint …

Read more

Unintelligent Design?

Allow me, for a moment, to explain some of my initial thoughts concerning what denial of God’s existence entails with respect to Design. If you hold that there is no God, and that there is no Design to the universe, there are a few things that follow. If there is no Designer, and if there is no Design, then there are no “designers” and there are no individual “designs.” None, at all, anywhere. I will now proceed to explain the same thing in probably too many ways and in probably too many words.

There is only cause and effect. “Intention” …

Read more

You Didn’t Build That

You wake up in the middle of a cornfield.

You sit up and rub your eyes, and then you look around. Instinctively, you stand up and start walking. As you push your way through thousands of stalks you suddenly find yourself in a small clearing, a row of flattened corn stalks. Considering you’ve been navigating through fully grown, standing stalks, as far as you’re concerned this clearing is nothing short of odd. You continue on past the clearing, back into the stalks, and a minute later you find yourself in another clearing, this one sort of curved. After a half …

Read more

Problems With Authority in Classical and Evidentialist Apologetics

To the extent that attempts are made in order to distinguish between the “evidentialist” and “classical” schools of apologetics, in an effort to salvage the “classical” method, these distinctions nevertheless fail to dodge the criticisms leveled at evidentialism by Van Tilian presuppositionalists. It shouldn’t strike us as very coincidental that the problem presuppositionalists have with the classical/evidentialist methods primarily concerns the presuppositions of these methods. Furthermore, that practitioners of either the classical or evidentialist methods borrow aspects from presuppositionalism (which I would argue is inevitable as long as the practitioner is at least to some extent devoted to sola scriptura

Read more

Proof and Persuasion Confusion

I was pointed to a post by J. Warner Wallace where he seeks to give a distinction between evidence and proof. This is in itself something good to do because who has not heard people scream “SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE!” as though if they are shown enough evidence that it is proof [of something].

The following statement seems to provide the basis of Wallace’s apparent confusion between proof and persuasion. Wallace writes the following:

While evidence is a matter of objective truth, proof is in the mind of the evaluator, and many of us resist the truth in spite

Read more

When Contra Munda isn’t All About You

Back in the third century of the church, as I’m sure some of our readers are aware, there was a bishop named Athanasius – his tenacious defense of the doctrine of the Trinity, in opposition to the swiftly growing heresy of Arianism gave rise to the statement “Athanasius contra mundum” – Athanasius against the world. In a sense, this wasn’t quite true – there were other defenders of the Trinity around, but none so prolific, and none who were targeted nearly so heavily as Athanasius, who was ejected from his church five times, and was only vindicated after his death. …

Read more

Addressing a Common Evidentialist Retort

My brother-in-law went to school with an atheist who excelled in virtually every subject he studied. This particular atheist was a sharp thinker. He was also firm in his atheistic convictions. But he liked to drink. A lot. One night he had a bit too much. By the end of the night he was weeping and crying out about how there has to be a God. Plenty of his friends witnessed the event. They brought it up later. His response was to grumpily tell them not to talk about it.

My old Sunday School teacher had a friend who came …

Read more