Apologetics to the Glory of God

Tag: presup

  • Should we concede anything to our opponents?

    Series on Does God Exist? Dr. Greg Bahnsen versus Dr. Gordon Stein

    Debate Transcript

    Should we argue for “general theism”?

    Should our case be “subjective or personal”?

    Should we concede anything to our opponents?

    Bahnsen’s last introductory remark prior to his main argument for the existence of God involves a concession to Stein’s “area of expertise.” As insignificant as this concession seemingly is it serves as a refutation of the oft-repeated-but-never-cited claim that presuppositional apologists contend that unbelievers cannot know anything. The truth is that if unbelievers were epistemologically consistent they could not know anything, but unbelievers are never epistemologically …

  • Nature Grace Dualism (Part 2)

    Nature Grace Dualism Part 1

    Nature Grace Dualism Part 2

    The presence of nature grace dualism throughout Roman Catholicism has resulted in a host of worries. Goldsworthy quotes Vittorio Subilia’s observation that Roman Catholicism is marked by “a phenomenon of complexio oppositorum.”  The claim is an historical one supported by the evidence of Roman Catholic syncretism. While Gnosticism and mystery religions are cited as examples of non-Christian systems of thought that have at times been adopted by Roman Catholicism and blended in with Christian categories the non-Christian systems of thought stemming directly from philosophy are perhaps more interesting to …

  • WCF, LBC, and TAG

    A friend pointed me toward this post by Brandon Adams. From what I can tell Brandon is influenced a good bit by Gordon H. Clark and argues in his post that Van Tillian presuppositionalism and specifically TAG is inconsistent with the WCF and LBC. While I am not one to excitedly engage in the Van Til versus Clark debate there are a few areas where I believe Brandon is simply mistaken about Van Til and Bahnsen’s method. One of the reasons I do not tend to engage in arguments against Clarkianism is that I am rather unfamiliar with the position. …

  • Thoughts of H.W.B. Joseph

    In 1931 a late nineteenth and early twentieth century philosopher at Oxford by the name of H.W.B. Joseph published a book called Some Problems in Ethics. The following is quoted from the aforementioned work:

    If thought is laryngeal motion, how should any one think more truly than the wind blows? All movements of bodies are equally necessary, but they cannot be discriminated as true and false. It seems as nonsensical to call a movement true as a flavor purple or a sound avaricious. But what is obvious when thought is said to be a certain bodily movement seems equally

    …

  • Should our case be “subjective or personal”?

    Series on Does God Exist? Dr. Greg Bahnsen versus Dr. Gordon Stein

    Debate Transcript

    Should we argue for “general theism”?

    Should our case be “subjective or personal”?

    Having presented his reasons for arguing for Christian theism as a unit or system of thought Bahnsen moves on to discuss what the debate is about. Bahnsen transitions from the aforementioned topic he addresses at the very beginning of his first opening statement through placing a slightly different emphasis upon the systematic nature of Christian theism. Bahnsen is arguing for Christian theism as a unit or system of thought so that the debate …

  • Choosing Hats Turns Two!!!

    The end of July/beginning of August marks the two year anniversary of Choosing Hats! We are grateful to God for the good he has brought about through the site and determined to fix anything which has kept us from using the site to its full potential. We want to thank our many readers for taking time out of their day to see what’s new here and those who have left comments for putting forth the effort to understand and interact with the material here.

    Those involved with Choosing Hats have recently been discussing how we might bring the site back …

  • An Argument For Agreus

    One might deny that laws of logic exist, but not without presupposing the laws of logic (i.e. the law of non-contradiction). Since the affirmation of a proposition implies the falsehood of its contradictory, the denial of the laws of logic is self-refuting.

    The possibility of rational inference presupposes the laws of logic (i.e. identity; non-contradiction), but the laws of logic entail that nonphysical, nonspatial, nontemporal reality of some sort be accepted. The laws of logic are not physical laws as is evidenced by the fact that they are applicable to possible worlds in which there are no physical objects. [1]…

  • A Few Items of Interest

    How do I know God exists? from A Passion for Life on Vimeo.

    HT: Jamin Hubner

    Also – if you have not seen it already – Triablogue has an interesting post concerning Van Til and the knowledge of unbelievers here and there is a post concerning Van Til’s view of “presupposition” here.…

  • Norman Geisler and Moral Relativism

    Cross posted.

    “Ethics deals with what is morally right and wrong. Christian Ethics deals with what is morally right and wrong for a Christian.” Norman Geisler. Christian Ethics: Options and Issues. Grand Rapids, MI. Baker Academic, 1989. Pg. 17. (All quotations and paraphrases in this post are from this source.)

    Let’s step carefully through Dr. Geisler’s statements.

    “Ethics deals with what is morally right and wrong.”

    To state that ethics deals with what is morally right and wrong is rather straightforward. If any objections to Geisler’s statements are to be raised they must be raised with respect to the …

  • Education

    Jamin Hubner has written a brief article concerning education and accreditation which may be found at AOMin by clicking here.…