No Excuse for God
In
the
beginning,
GOD.
Four words into God’s living and active autobiography and, boom, there He is. Front and center. No beating around the bush. After all, from Him and through Him and to Him are all things (Romans 11:36), so it should be no surprise that the Bible begins with Him.…
Read moreRegular Reformed Guys: The Transcendental Argument
We had the opportunity to interview Brian Knapp, co-founder and former contributor of Choosing Hats on my podcast The Regular Reformed Guys.
We talked about what the transcendental argument is, why it is a more biblical, and effective means of doing apologetics, and we talked about the modern development of Van Til’s work.
Read moreWhy Machen Hired Van Til
… Read moreFor a variety of historical reasons American Presbyterians throughout the nineteenth century were fully committed to the Enlightenment and scientific methods as the surest means for arriving at truth. Though still believing in the authority of Scripture, the best—or at least the most widely accepted—way of demonstrating the truth of the Bible was by appealing to reason and Scripture’s harmony with nature and the self-evident truths of human experience.
Questions about Covenantal Apologetics & the Transcendental Argument?
Just a reminder for those who may be new to Covenantal Apologetics (Presuppositionalism) or the Transcendental Argument for the existence of God (TAG)
We have a lot of material here on the blog, but if you’re looking for something specific, or if you have a question, feel free to check out our FAQ, or join us in our chat channel.…
Read moreShe Disciples: The Problem with Evidence
A new(ish) women’s theology blog – She Disciples – recently published an article about Presuppositionalism and the problems with evidentialism.
We suggest you check it out: http://www.shedisciples.com/problem-evidence-apologetics/…
Read moreOliphint on Understanding Cornelius Van Til
On Proper Analysis – Scott Terry and VanTillianFire
The author, Aaron Dale, at the blog “Van Tillian Fire,” has written a critique of my much-critiqued “Dear Sye” post. For reasons unbeknownst to me, he neglected to read the post of the following day, “The Shattered Stained Glass Window”, as well as the post “A Necessary Distinction.” Why is this important, you ask? It is important because these were written several months ago – and written specifically to provide specifics about issues I left unstated, or merely referred to in general terms in the initial post. Why did I leave them unstated? I left them …
Read moreVan Tilian Turf Wars (Part 2)
Presuppositionalists are sticklers for sound apologetic methodology. But how is sound apologetic methodology discerned? Presuppositional proclivities preclude the vast majority of classical or evidentialist approaches to apologetics. That much is clear. But how does one determine who is right and who is wrong when presuppositionalists argue about methodology amongst themselves? Perhaps we all agree that presuppositional apologetic methodology is the way to go, but who is to say what presuppositional apologetic method is? Is there some standard of presuppositional orthodoxy?
Fundamentalist presuppositionalists tend to respond to these questions by citing the Bible as their ultimate authority for apologetics. The …
Read moreA Presuppositional Devotion
It is interesting to come across some very presuppositional teaching from people who don’t really fly the flag and I like to note it when I do. August 10, 2014 “For the Love of God” devotional by D. A. Carson was one such devotional. I especially appreciated his call for people to be precise about the use of the Psalm 14:1 and Romans 1. I think it is a good reminder for us all as it seems like much of the recent popular apologetics billing itself as “presuppositional” is more about the misapplying these passage by simply calling people fools …