Apologetics to the Glory of God

Tag: method

  • My Debate Opponent Converted To Theism!

    Please note that this post is not a part of my current debate with Nocterro.

    Excited? I am not.

    The title of Nocterro’s most recent post at Urban Philosophy is A Conversion. The title is puzzling. In what way has Nocterro experienced a “conversion”? One thing is for certain; he is no Christian. Nocterro has merely changed his position on the matter of the existence of “God”. He now professes to be a theist.

    Not only is “conversion” not being used in a Christian sense here but neither is “God”. One learns quickly that what Nocterro has in view …

  • Check out this offer on “Speaking the Truth in Love: The Theology of John M. Frame”!

    Thanks to Zao Thanatoo for contacting me about a 50% discount on John Frame’s festschrift Speaking the Truth in Love: The Theology of John M. Frame edited by John J. Hughes (P&R, 2009) through Dr. James N. Anderson’s blog. Click here to find out how to take advantage of this generous offer!

    You may also read Dr. Anderson’s contribution to the book here. Many thanks to Dr. Anderson for the work he has done through the years developing his ‘attenuated’ Van Tilianism. I look forward to more of his work in the future.…

  • 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 …

  • Honesty In Apologetics

    For some time now I have wanted to post concerning honesty in apologetics. Honesty appears to be just as scarce in much apologetic material as humility. There are a number of reasons I have not yet written the post. One such reason is that I have been a bit under the weather. My desk is rather full at the moment as well and I owe several people responses. Thankfully I found a well written post on the topic here that I can just link to and encourage you to read.

    See you when I am well, Lord willing!…

  • Should we argue for “general theism”?

     

     

    In my experience the presuppositionalist program of setting out to defend specifically Christian theism generally produces scoffing rather than interaction. At the beginning of his debate with Gordon Stein, Greg Bahnsen states his position on this matter. He says, “I want to specify that I’m arguing particularly in favor of Christian theism, and for it as a unit or system of thought and not for anything like theism in general, and there are reasons for that.”

    There are at least two senses in which Bahnsen explains he will not be arguing for or defending theism in general. Bahnsen …

  • Proving the Bible

    Jamin Hubner at Real Apologetics has written another very fine article which may be found here.…

  • Some of Nocterro’s Presuppositions

    Someone commenting on the site by the name Nocterro recently posted the following:

    I just have one final point to make regarding presuppositions.

    Presuppose: To believe or suppose in advance. (American Heritage Dictionary, 4th edition).

    You said earlier in this discussion: “You presuppose autonomy in that you reject the Lordship of Christ and the interpretation of the resurrection provided by Scripture which states that it was a supernatural event and assume that a naturalistic interpretation is possible for any given evidence.”

    This is wrong. In fact, you could say that I started with similar presuppositions to the ones that you

    …

  • Bravo Nocterro

    Kudos to Nocterro (who sometimes comments here) for writing a pretty clear explanation of what presuppositionalists have been saying for some time now.

    Showing that the Bible is correct in its historical claims does not show it is correct in its theological claims…

    Imagine for the sake of argument that someone showed that Jesus did indeed resurrect…All it would show is that a man resurrected, not that Yahweh exists and that such a being was the cause of such an event. It could have been that it was the doing of some other sort of god, or even something else

    …

  • 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 …