Apologetics to the Glory of God

Tag: method

  • Pragmatic Point: The Failure of the Cartesian Method of Doubt

    In his Meditations on First Philosophy, Rene Descartes utilizes a method of doubt in order to determine whether or not there is any such thing as certainty. The American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce later critiques Descartes not necessarily on the basis of what many other philosophers find fault with in Descartes, but rather on the very method of doubt itself. While there appears to be plenty of room for debate about whether or not Peirce is fair to Descartes with respect to parts of Descartes’ method of doubt, Peirce is justified in the main point of his critique which …

  • 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 …

  • Don’t Be An Ostrich

     

    In The Fixation of Belief Peirce describes four methods for the “fixation of belief”. According to Peirce, the goal of inquiry is to settle one’s opinion. Thus Peirce asks, “why should we not attain the desired end, by taking as answer to a question any we may fancy, and constantly reiterating it to ourselves, dwelling on all which may conduce to that belief, and learning to turn with contempt and hatred from anything that might disturb it?”[1] This is what Peirce refers to as the “Method of Tenacity”. Now I must wonder whether or not this reminds you of …

  • Falling Down

    A section of the ongoing discussion between Chris the evil Presuppositionlist (inside joke, sorry) and Mitch over at Urban Philosophy caught my attention today.  It is a section that discusses the concept of “common ground” between believer and unbeliever by using the analogy of gravity.  Here is the entirety of what Mitch stated caught my attention:

    The common ground of reality affect both the believer and the non-believer, and this is a common ground from which dialogue may begin. Knowledge of gravity is not required for the effects of gravity. We do not see babies flying because they do not

    …

  • Where To Start

    When it comes to disagreements about the existence of God people usually want to proceed without ever setting down a clear set of rules by which to make a case. We often assume that we are all thinking along the same lines as to what the rules are when it comes to discussions about God and truth and knowledge and other such subjects. This assumption is unfortunate because Christians and non-Christians “play” by a different set of rules. The amount of literature written about the subject of the existence of God could fill libraries, yet if we searched through all …

  • A Different Set of Rules

    Imagine you are at a friend’s house playing a game of pool. Your friend begins the game by breaking, but not a single ball goes into a pocket. Now it is your turn. You step up, adjust your pool stick just right, and sink a striped ball into a side pocket. You call solids but your friend objects.

    “Huh? You can’t be solids. You sank a striped, so you are stripes.”

    “Nope. It doesn’t go by what kind of ball you sink first. Being the first to sink a ball just means that you get to choose first, not that …

  • Beware of Philosophy!

    It is not uncommon to find people who are afraid of philosophy. Philosophy makes people question things. When people question things they start believing new things. It can be dangerous to believe new things. Besides, philosophers are weird. They stand out from the crowd. They are picky about what they say and write and do. Philosophers look at the world in a different way from most other people.

    Christians are often afraid of philosophy. The reason for this is that they take their beliefs so seriously. It is sinful to question God and His Word, and philosophy can lead people …

  • Sacrificing the Gospel on the Altar of Unbiblical Apologetics

    Often so-called objections to the presuppositionalist methodology are downright frightening. Take the article “Always Ready to Give an Answer” written by Caleb Colley.

    Under the section on presuppositionalism, Caleb writes the following:

    “While the presuppositionalist is right that worldview is important, the presuppositional approach is in conflict with Paul’s prescription of the cosmological argument”

    Um…I am sorry?

    “the presuppositional approach is in conflict with Paul’s prescription of the cosmological argument”

    Now I do not know about other people, but I am left wondering how people prior to Paul came to know that God exists without Paul being alive to present …