Apologetics to the Glory of God

Tag: FAQ

  • Seen Elsewhere – On Comments

    A comment on this post I’d like to reply to.

    Dave,
    I rarely allow comments from adherents to unorthodox positions on one of my teaching posts – especially those comments with content covered by multiple entries in the FAQ, the site rules, or that have been answered elsewhere on the site. We have quite a different conception of the purpose for the comment section than most blogs do. Further, I prefer there be some apologetic benefit to engaging your comment – I saw none in that instance, as it seemed to be an assertion without argument that Reformed …

  • The FAQ Section: A Reminder

    This is just a friendly reminder to new site commenters as well as visitors to our chat channel. As it says in the comment section, please make sure you have read through the FAQ section before making a comment, or asking a question in the chat channel. Obviously, we haven’t addressed every objection there is – but we do have at least a general context given there for most objections, and their general categories, which should inform our mutual discussion.

    This section can be visited by clicking the “FAQ” tab up top – if there is a subject that you’d …

  • New: FAQ section

    As some of you may have noticed already, there’s a new button on our top navbar. This will take you to our new “frequently asked questions” page. We also address “common objections”, as well. As it says, we’re still working on it, so please forgive any changes you may see over the next few months. As it also says, if you’d like to submit any questions you find yourself commonly asked, or commonly ask presuppositionalists, avail yourself of the contact form. A new subject line should be added shortly 🙂…

  • Did Van Til set Christianity alongside other worldviews?

    I was sent a link to some sort of “progressive” podcast, called “Homebrew Christianity”, with a guest named Peter Rollins. Mr. Rollins, supposedly, is a “Christian atheist”, in some existential sense. His self-description, frankly, was rambling, confused a host of categories, and was quite unintelligible. The host(s) were equally confused, rambling, and made a riproaring shambles out of every theological topic they touched. I’m more than happy to link to the podcast so you can see for yourself, being quite confident that the ideas expressed therein are self-refuting. Be that as it may, I was interested primarily because he …