Apologetics to the Glory of God

Tag: Greg Bahnsen

  • The Recent Rise of Covenantal Apologetics (7 of 10)

    Sye TenBruggencate is the man responsible for restoring my confidence in a presuppositional method of apologetics. He is also responsible for introducing the method to countless other Christians who have heard his debates and seen his website.

    The popularity of Sye TenBruggencate seems to have skyrocketed following his appearance on Justin Brierley’s Unbelievable where he debated atheist Paul Baird. But Sye has been around for quite some time. Those in presuppositionalist circles knew him from his unique proofthatgodexists.org website long before it hit the public eye.

    Sye writes:

    I’m 48 years old, single, and live in Ontario, Canada. I was

  • The Recent Rise of Covenantal Apologetics (5 of 10)

    “Theology matters and theology determines apologetic methodology.” – Dr. James R. White

    The entire program of presuppositional apologetics can be summed up in the “need for consistency” challenge constantly set forth by Dr. James R. White of Alpha and Omega Ministries. If one ever wonders where the present day Greg Bahnsen of apologetics is one need look no further than Dr. White. Such a statement might ruffle some feathers, but having followed Dr. White’s ministry for a few years now I believe the statement is substantiated by the ministry delivered to Dr. White by the grace of God.

    From C.L. …

  • Christian Books on Homosexuality

    A few people asked me about books on homosexuality. Here are three that I recommend:

    The classic work on this topic is The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics by Robert A.J. Gagnon.

    James R. White & Jeffrey D. Niell wrote what is probably my favorite treatment of it, The Same Sex Controversy.

    Finally, Homosexuality: A Biblical View by Greg L. Bahnsen is available online for free.…

  • Why Dr. Jason Lisle of Answers in Genesis Does Not Understand Presuppositional Apologetics

    In a recent post I mentioned that, “I have heard a fair amount about a book by a Dr. Lisle but have not had the opportunity to read it” while referring to presuppositionalist strains in Answers in Genesis material. Someone commented here to affirm that, “Dr. Jason Lisle (astrophycisist) does indeed hold to a Van Tillian, ‘presuppositional’ apologetic method.”

    Today I read a post by Lisle wherein he addresses a reader’s questions about presuppositional apologetics. Unfortunately I find his answer to be completely out of line with the method. I quote the relevant portion of his post below and then …

  • Annihilationism, Conditionalism, Monism, et al.: The “Musty Canard” of the Alleged Platonic Dualistic Interpretive Lens

    Adherents to a number of theological positions that are often related to annihilationism posit that the vast majority of Christians throughout history have incorrectly read the anthropological and eschatological teachings of Scripture through the Greek lens of Platonic dualism such that they have also settled upon unbiblical conclusions regarding the constitution of the human being, the intermediate state, and the eternal punishment of the wicked.

    Even Greg Bahnsen gave some credence to this accusation (http://www.cmfnow.com/articles/pa143.htm), though he continued to hold that there is an immaterial aspect to the human mind, an intermediate state in virtue of a temporary …

  • Robinson Reviews McManis’ Biblical Apologetics

    Mike Robinson, the prolific book reviewer, presuppositional author and blogger, reviews Clifford McManis’ introductory offering, Biblical Apologetics: Advancing and Defending the Gospel of Christ.

    See Chris’ take here (and make sure you read the comments!).…

  • 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 …

  • Ben Wallis on Van Tilian Presuppositionalism (Updated)

    UPDATE: Ben Wallis has edited his post to reflect his take on my concerns. See here – http://benwallis.blogspot.com/2012/02/reasonable-doubtcasters-on-van-tilian.html?showComment=1330427431782#c5897980217578008803

    _____________________

    I like Ben Wallis, and he takes some really interesting angles in philosophical discussions, but I fear we often talk past one another.

    Perhaps I am missing something in Ben’s most recent post, but his comments there appear less than fair. You may read the post in its entirety here – http://benwallis.blogspot.com/2012/02/reasonable-doubtcasters-on-van-tilian.html.

    In that post, Wallis praises the recent work of the Reasonable Doubts podcast that pertains to presuppositional apologetics. Essentially, the hosts there appealed to Michael Martin’s TANG, Mitch …

  • Theology Versus Philosophy

    As someone who loves, and uses, both theology and philosophy on a routine basis, I am somewhat confused by the perceived great divide between the two disciplines. Theologians typically tout the sanctified status of their discipline while demonizing philosophy as though it is evil in and of itself. Meanwhile philosophers boast about their clarity and demean theology as though its contributions to Christianity are not that important after all. Yet each party struggles to define its discipline in distinction from the other. And both have serious problems with relating to the other party. These things should not be!

    Those who …

  • Mr. White, Mr. Grey, and Mr. Black VII

    “But how can anyone know anything about the ‘Beyond’?” asks Mr. Black.
    “Well, of course,” replies Mr. Grey, “if you want absolute certainty, such as one gets in geometry, Christianity does not offer it. We offer you only ‘rational probability.’ ‘Christianity,’ as I said in effect a moment ago when I spoke of the death of Christ, ‘is founded on historical facts, which, by their very nature, cannot be demonstrated with geometric certainty. All judgments of historical particulars are at the mercy of the complexity of the time-space universe. . . . If the scientist cannot rise above rational probability