Apologetics to the Glory of God

Tag: Fristianity

  • A Startling New Discovery

    Just the other day, I happened upon an amazing article about a new manuscript find. Of all things that could have been unearthed, what was brought to light but a set of instructions from Paul, to an antecedent of Marcion! What this means, essentially, is that Paul, under the guise of being “apostle to the Gentiles”, was a secret destroyer! What he did, you see, is to discredit the Judaizers – anathematized them, in fact, and even insulted them in one of his letters (in a quite vulgar way). Then, he proceeded to undercut their growing influence with the leaders …

  • Questioning Copan

    The Gospel Coalition is running a series on apologetics, and today’s entry was by Paul Copan, entitled “Questioning Presuppositionalism”. What struck me, while reading his take on the subject, was how superficial and inaccurate it was. He introduces Van Til, and then says that Gordon Clark supposedly “generally followed” his methodology, along with Bahnsen and Frame, and then called it “variegated”. Well, given that he’s simply wrong concerning Clark, and that Frame consciously departed from Van Til as well, I’d supposed that’s an assumption guaranteed to result in a certain conclusion, wouldn’t you? It is not the case that …

  • Is Fristianity Actual? (Updated with response from David Byron)

    UPDATE: David Byron has offered clarification in a comment, but I did not want to risk people missing it. Please see his response now included at the bottom of the body of the post.


    One of the greatest worries with the Fristianity objection is that it is often defined in conflicting ways. For example Sean Choi writes, “Of course, Fristianity is not an actual worldview or religion, as is, for example, Islam. But no one – certainly not I – is claiming this.” Yet in a footnote Choi cites David Byron of the Van Til List as popularizing Fristianity. …

  • Is Fristianity Sufficient?

    Michael Butler as quoted by Sean Choi contends, “If Fristianity is otherwise identical to Christianity, the only way for us to know [that its god is a quadrinity] would be for the Fristian god to reveal this to us.” Choi takes this proposition to be false and explains why.

    That the Fristian God is a quadrinity is something we know to be true in virtue of stipulation… (Indeed, that is how Butler himself introduced the concept of Fristianity.) Butler is suggesting that there is mystery here when there is none. “Fristianity” has come to mean what it does precisely because

  • Praxis Presup: Episode 5

    Praxis Presup
    Episode 5 – September 27th, 2010
    Chris Bolt

    Chris and his friends discuss Sean Choi’s “Fristianity” as it appears in Reasons For Faith.

    Praxis Presup 5

  • Hey Jude

    Some time ago I wrote a short post while thinking through some issues raised by a commenter calling himself Theo Beza. He responded and I replied that it would take me some time to get to what he wrote. One concern he raised will be addressed here briefly.

    Theo Beza wrote:

    When I said that Fristianity is the same as Christianity except for a Quadrinity, I wasn’t suggesting that every claim possibly labeled as Christian or made by Christians in history is a claim endorsed by Fristianity (with the obvious exception of Trinity). I was sort of looking at it

  • Putting Frist On A Diet

    One of the weaknesses of Fristianity is also one of its strengths. The many different versions of Fristianity can make it difficult to grasp and answer. Fristianity proponents might exclaim that this difficulty is the whole point. There are a number of problems with this response. If Fristianity is no different from general objections concerning the impossibility of the contrary then it is superfluous. Similarly, if Fristianity is no different from various other objections concerning presuppositionalism in general and TAG in particular then it is superfluous. Finally, the different versions of Fristianity are often essentially different from each other rather …

  • A Fristian Strikes Out Revisited: Response to “Theo Beza”

    Not too long ago I posted regarding a Fristianity Style Counter (FSC) to TAG from “John Calvin”. You may find the post here (https://choosinghats.org/?p=876) but it is reposted below.

    In that post the particular FSC that John Calvin had offered was in my view successfully refuted by appealing to an analogous argument offered by Paul Manata. An individual commenting on the post using the name “Theo Beza” offered a series of irrelevant and hence unsuccessful objections to my critique of the FSC.  Here I will repost A Fristian Strikes Out in order to provide the context needed to …

  • A Fristian Strikes Out

    As I was browsing the Internet today I came across the following from a “John Calvin”:

    “All right. So all the Fristian needs to do is to say that ‘Fristianity’ is whatever subset of Christian claims the TAGster thinks we need for preconditions of intelligibility, *except that* the Trinity is a Quadrinity.”

    How does someone disprove a worldview that has the same propositions as Christianity except for the additional proposition that there is a fourth person in God?

    In my view, thinking of the “preconditions of intelligibility” as a “subset of Christian claims” may be a rather substantial error, but …