Why Shouldn’t Paul Baird Choose Hats?

Paul Baird has given us his opinion in the case of the use of worldviews he does not adhere to.

This is a common complaint ie why argue a worldview that you do not hold ? The answer is the tallest child in the playground argument ie I do not have to be the tallest child in the playground to point out that you are not the tallest child in the playground – I can point out that individual (in this instance it would be a child of equal size).

Paul’s understanding here doesn’t really deal with the problem being …

Read more

The Unfortunate Case of the Missing Argument

I’m not going to link all of Paul’s posts in this – they’ve been linked ad nauseum from here, already. His blog is Patient and Persistent – I trust our readers are more than capable of finding these comments of his 🙂

There are times when I’m engaged in an exchange with someone and I’m not sure if I’ve understood them correctly. That’s how I felt reading Chris Bolt’s stuff. It turns out that I did understand him correctly.

Note: Paul does not here explain 1) What he understood correctly, or 2) How it is the case that he understood …

Read more

The Glory of God – Shai Linne

I was reading the lyrics to Shai Linne’s latest single that will be part of his new “Attributes of God” album and had a few thoughts come to mind regarding the use of this media in apologetics. I will only highlight one here, namely, the positive case for the Christian worldview. What I mean by this is what Paul modeled at Athens where he gave the stoics and philosophers a crash course in Theology. Paul built a foundation from which Christ and His work would be interpreted. But as can be seen in Acts, Paul was stopped when he mentioned …

Read more

Full Assurance, Epistemic Certainty, and Christ

Much to my dismay, there have been those who would consider themselves  in the camp of Presuppositional/Covenantal  apologetics that have moved away from the idea that we can be epistemically (having to do with knowledge) certain of our faith. Contrary to their claims, the Apostles knew nothing of an uncertain apologetic. This has been argued many times by Presuppositionalist/Covenantal apologists such as Dr. Greg Bahnsen.

I appreciated how Dr. Lane Tipton defined the distinctive of The Westminster approach to apologetics (i.e. The reformed, biblical, covenantal approach) in a Youtube video entitled “Christ-Centered Apologetics

Where I think our distinctive

Read more

Various and Sundry Issues to Recap

Last week, my comment at Aporetic Christianity resulted in a bit of a firestorm – of posts, and sometimes fiery discussion. I’d like to use this opportunity to make a few comments on this exchange, and exchanges in general. In the exchange between Paul, myself, and BK, some might consider the “tone” in places to be overly harsh. While I think Paul may have thought at one point that I was objecting to the tone, I think we’ve come to at least a partial understanding of the other’s goals. That being said, there’s a balance to be had in the …

Read more

Knowledge, Attenuated VanTillianism, and a False Dilemma

Yesterday, I did some commenting on a post by Paul Manata entitled “Do All Men Know that God Exists?“.

In this post, he offers a couple possible responses he would consider Van Tillians to potentially offer, tells us he’s an “attenuated” Van Tillian (which is unsurprising, at best); we interacted in the comments for a bit, (complete with his typical ad hominem) and he returns today with a bit of screed, venting about Van Tillians. His problem, apparently, seems to be my “certainty”. Far be it from me to point out that he acts anything but uncertain, but …

Read more

How about a little offense? by defectivebit (Guest Post)

In the thirteenth chapter of Always Ready Dr. Greg Bahnsen states

“The Christian cannot forever be defensively constructing atomistic answers to the endless variety of unbelieving criticisms; he must take the offensive and show the unbeliever that he has no intelligible place to stand, no consistent epistemology, no justification for meaningful discourse, predication, or argumentation.”[1]

I have often wondered why it is that in most debates I watch between a Christian and a non-Christian that the Christian spends very little time on the offensive side of the battle. This affinity to a defensive posture was also made clear to …

Read more

Answering the Argument from Horrific Suffering 4

Argument from Horrific Suffering

The exchange has taken place as follows: The Argument from Horrific Suffering for the Non-Existence of God (Mitch) / Answering the Argument from Horrific Suffering (Chris) / Bolt and Horrific Suffering (Mitch) / Answering the Argument from Horrific Suffering 2 (Chris) / Bolt and Horrific Suffering II (Mitch) / Answering the Argument from Horrific Suffering 3 (Chris) / Bolt and Horrific Suffering III (Mitch) / …Answers the Argument from Horrific Suffering (ZaoThanatoo).

Mitch notes that I am still challenging premise (4) of the following argument:

Horrific Suffering (def.) = that most awe-full form of suffering that

Read more