Apologetics to the Glory of God

Tag: logic

  • Lost In A Sea Of Subjectivism

    Mitch LeBlanc has posted the draft for his journal submission on The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God. In the Abstract for the article, he writes, “I present a couple of objections formulated by Sean Choi and Michael Martin and develop three of my own”. It has been pointed out already that whatever Mitch is arguing against, it is not Bahnsen’s TAG. Given that even I, though not very well read on TAG, had encountered the objections from Choi and Martin no later than 2007 and given the recent interaction found here and here with some of the …

  • No Place To Stand Part II

    In response to my previous post Mitch has written this post.

    Unfortunately the tendency Mitch has to advance irrelevant arguments continues in this post as well. Presuppositionalism is immune to the criticisms Mitch raises against it because, among other things, the majority position in presuppositionalism which I also adhere to does not involve the claim that logic is contingent as Mitch has stated in several of his arguments but rather that logic is necessary. Thus Mitch has allegedly advanced arguments against presuppositionalism that fall prey to the Straw Man Fallacy and may be submitting an entry to a philosophical …

  • No Place To Stand

    People have repeatedly called my attention to three posts by Mitch LeBlanc at www.urbanphilosophy.net wherein he makes a “case against presuppositionalism”. There are reasons I have put off writing anything about them other than not having a great deal of time. The arguments contained in the posts are in fact not what they claim to be (arguments against presuppositionalism), but are arguments against the Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God. The arguments presented do not originate with Mitch at all, a fact he readily admits, but are arguments familiar to many presuppositionalists that have been rehashed. Some of the …

  • On Divine Simplicity and Malformed Arguments

    Reformed theology, as properly expressed, considers the doctrine of God’s unity not as the classical formulation used by Aquinas and the Scholastics, but as a unity of being; in which all attributes of God are distinct in their display, necessarily interrelated but not identical to each other, despite being differentiated expressions of God’s singular, essential nature. The Scholastics (following the lead of earlier writers) may be summed up as follows: “It is commonly said in theology that God’s attributes are God himself, as he has revealed himself to us… It was further asserted by the Scholastics that the whole essence …

  • When I Use a Word …

    ‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.’

    ‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

    ‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master – that’s all.’

    For those of you who have read Alice in Wonderland, this exchange between Alice and Humpty Dumpty may ring a bell.  I know it rings a bell with me, because it has been “used” against me in many discussions/debates I have had about God, …

  • Tu Quoque Argument Advanced as a Primer for the Presuppositionalist Response to Evidentialist Critiques of Method

    Arguments which cut both ways are not always self-refuting, but are significantly weakened by their hypocritical nature. The activities of traditional non-presuppositionalist apologists almost always fall prey to the same objections the proponents of the traditional method advance in their critiques of presuppositionalism.

    Just today I heard a professional apologist and philosopher argue that the Transcendental Argument for God, an argument utilized within the presuppositional method of apologetics, may more or less be dismissed because an unbeliever might quite easily claim that logic is something other than what the presuppositionalist needs to portray logic as in order to make his …

  • Collision Gets A Bad Review

    While I have had Collision for some time now and have watched parts of it, I did not get to sit down and soak up the entirety of the movie until today. In my opinion, it was rather well done and fills a gap in the world of apologetics by seeking to engage the layperson in a way other apologetic presentations cannot. Of course, others may have extremely different opinions.

    Well known apologist Douglas Groothuis does not share my sentiments concerning the movie. He has written a less than positive review which may be found here – http://theconstructivecurmudgeon.blogspot.com/2009/11/colision-dvd-review.html Allow me …

  • Just For Fun: How to drive punchy blokes up the wall

    Chris:  Nothing exists or God exists.

    Chris:  Something exists.

    Chris:  Therefore God exists.

    Anon:  Sorry, Chris?

    Anonymous:  chris, isn’t that logic a bit…….. flawed

    Chris:  What’s flawed about it?

    Anonymous:  If something exists God must exist?

    Anonymous:  this stems from “why is there something rather then nothing?”

    Chris:  No.

    Chris:  Where is that in what I wrote?

    Anonymous:  it sounds similiar, i apologize if I put words in your moutn.

    Chris:  Nothing to apologize for.

    Anonymous:  anyways, why would something existing necessitate the existence of  God?

    Chris:  Because of the truth of the first premise.

    Chris:  Something = Not-Nothing

    Anonymous:  …

  • “Does God Exist?” My Opening Statement (2006)

    Opening Statement
    “Does God Exist?”
    Central Virginia Community College
    February 2006

    Thank you all for coming out for the debate and thanks to Alex and Dr. McGee for being willing to help with this. I’d also like to thank my God, in whom we live and move and have our being. I want to make it clear from the start that the God I am talking about today is the God of the Christian scriptures. That’s the only God I care to prove because He is the only God who actually exists. I am happy to join Alex in refuting …

  • Nothing is Absolute

    I was checking in on some discussion boards I used to post regularly on and came across the following statement by an atheist in response to a discussion over the Bible:

    Atheist: All interpretation of the bible is subjective. You don’t hold the final word on it. It’s all in your own mind and isn’t absolute. Nothing is.

    If this gal had left off the last sentence, she probably wouldn’t have gotten my attention. After all, she was just sharing her own opinion about another gal’s interpretation of the Bible – nothing remarkable there. But that last sentence … …