Apologetics to the Glory of God

Tag: method

  • Undying Worms and Unquenchable Fire

    It is often asserted that there is a problem (for so-called “traditionalists”) with the use of Mark 9:48 due to it’s relation with Isaiah 66:24. This problem, according to Fudge, is that 1) Jesus quotes it “without amendment” 2) That the body is “already dead” and 3) That the fire “is a consuming, irresistible fire”. He relates “salted with fire” to mean the salting of a field, or of a place in order to make it uninhabitable. He cites Fields for his source, but we aren’t told, by Fudge, why this is supposed to have any connection with the passage …

  • Why Christians Are Stupid and Atheists Are Not

    If you were to buy into atheist propaganda on the Internet you would have no choice but to conclude that Christians are some of the most ignorant, irrational, dishonest, deluded idiots on the planet. In short if you are a Christian, then you are stupid. You can substitute whatever other derogatory term you would like in the place of stupid. The point is that something is seriously wrong with the idiots who believe these nonsensical fairy tales, etc. etc. You have heard it all before. You get the point.

    Of course I do not really need the atheists to tell …

  • 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 …

  • Islam: Allamah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabatabai on the Knowledge of Allah (2)

    In my previous post on Islam I began to address the attempt that Allamah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabatabai (ASMHT) makes to argue for the necessity of his god Allah through natural theology (123). ASMHT offers a rational argument that takes the subject of knowledge as its most basic assumption and speaks of three objects of knowledge in the very first sentence of his argument for Allah which are human beings, god, and the world. In order for him to make a successful argument, ASMHT must connect the subject of knowledge with these objects of knowledge.

    I asked …

  • John Starke on Van Til’s Influence on Christian Thought

    John Starke over at The Gospel Coalition takes a quick look at the affect Dr. Cornelius Van Til has had since his work at Westminster Theological Seminary.

    John Starke notes:

    Van Til transformed the discussions around epistemology and apologetics unlike anyone else in modern Christian history—being the main influence behind theologians, pastors, and apologists like John Frame, Tim Keller, David Powlison, Greg Bahnsen and the entire systematic and apologetics departments of Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia and California, headed by names like Michael Horton, Scott Oliphint, William Edgar, and David VanDrunen.

    Even Dr. Albert Mohler of SBTS has spoken of …

  • Fudge and Date: On how to view challenges to orthodoxy

    Date: “When you originally published your book, how was it received? Did you find that traditionalists were giving maybe some serious consideration to your work, and maybe reconsidering their own view, or did they consider you a threat and try to stamp out any influence you might have?”

    Fudge: “Interestingly, I’ve learned over the past 67 years, Chris, that the reactions I get to this subject, and to this book, are not really so much reactions to this book, as much as they are reactions out of the heart of the person who makes the reaction. And the same reaction

    …

  • How to Support Choosing Hats

    We are often asked how one might support Choosing Hats. Here are some suggestions.

    1. Please keep us in prayer. Pray specifically that we do not lose sight of the Gospel or the glory of God. Pray especially for our humility. And pray for those with whom we interact.
    2. Link to us. Tweet our posts. Encourage others to visit. If you found something useful on the site then your families, friends, and acquaintances might as well.
    3. Contribute to our journal.
    4. Visit our chat channel and say hello. We love your questions, comments, and suggestions. We enjoy meeting our readers.

    Some of …

  • Initial Thoughts on the Upcoming Debate

    I’m finding lots of commentary by folks who want to somehow separate the doctrine of the soul’s immortality from the doctrine of eternal punishment. Since, after all, we believe in Sola Scriptura, that necessarily includes “Tota Scriptura”, and the necessary relation of every doctrine to the others. This is a fundamental point of Reformed theology. No doctrine exists in isolation. The denial, or modification of one doctrine will quite necessarily have an effect on a host of others, due to the nature of Scripture, and the theology we affirm from it. In the introduction to Van Til’s Christian Theistic Evidences…

  • Debate: Annihilationism, with Chris Date

    Chris Date is the host of the Theopologetics podcast, and says that he has been convinced over the past year of the truth of annihilationism, sought out the best arguments he could find, and found them lacking. He will be defending the following:

    Resolution: “The final punishment of the risen wicked will be annihilation, the permanent end to the conscious existence of the entire person.”

    The debate is tentatively scheduled for June, with a fairly standard debate format, to include Q&A from questions submitted beforehand.

    Format:

  • 20-minute opening affirmative
  • 20-minute opening negative
  • 10-minute rebuttal affirmative
  • 10-minute rebuttal negative
    • …

  • Point of Contact and Human Reason

    It’s quite common to find the following objections made – just check out who is answering them as well as giving them for consideration.

    What has been said up to this point may seem to be discouraging in the extreme. It would seem that the argument up to this point has driven us to a denial of any point of contact whatsoever with the unbeliever. Is it not true that men must have some contact with the truth if they are to receive further knowledge of it? If men are totally ignorant of the truth, how can they even become

    …