Tag: Presuppositional Apologetics
-
Sye TenBrugencatte Debate
Yesterday I ran into Sye TenBrugencatte of www.proofthatgodexists.org and was reminded that I still have not quite gotten around to listening to his debate yet, but you can beat me to it here. He also has some interviews and videos at the bottom of that page.…
-
Van Til taught that nonbelievers cannot know anything
A common objection or typical misrepresentation of what Van Til taught in respect to presuppositional apologetics is that nonbelievers cannot or do not know anything. This usually stems from a misunderstanding of how the Christian view of epistemology works in practice and in principle regarding the nonbeliever as espoused by people who adhere to presuppositionalism. But first, let us allow Dr. Van Til speak for himself on this point as this objection will often be raised in the form “I heard Van Til wrote that nonbelievers don’t know anything.”
…Still further, it is when we presuppose with Calvin that all
-
Full Assurance, Epistemic Certainty, and Christ
Much to my dismay, there have been those who would consider themselves in the camp of Presuppositional/Covenantal apologetics that have moved away from the idea that we can be epistemically (having to do with knowledge) certain of our faith. Contrary to their claims, the Apostles knew nothing of an uncertain apologetic. This has been argued many times by Presuppositionalist/Covenantal apologists such as Dr. Greg Bahnsen.
I appreciated how Dr. Lane Tipton defined the distinctive of The Westminster approach to apologetics (i.e. The reformed, biblical, covenantal approach) in a Youtube video entitled “Christ-Centered Apologetics”
…Where I think our distinctive
-
Choosing Hats Welcomes Three New Contributors
Choosing Hats is bringing three new contributors onto the blog. We look forward to having them with us and want to officially welcome them to the site.
Resequitur
defectivebit
D.S. Smith
Keep an eye out for new posts from our new members!
Please keep us in prayer as we continue to grow and make changes to Choosing Hats in the hopes of better assisting you, our readers, through the explanation and demonstration of covenantal/presuppositional apologetics in defense of the Christian faith for the glory of God.…
-
In Antithesis: An Announcement – and A Call for Papers
In a previous post, Chris announced our intention to begin an apologetics journal; this current announcement both confirms those plans, and makes a small change. The finalized name for the journal, we’ve decided, is In Antithesis: A Reformed Apologetics Journal. You can now see the link to the Journal page in the upper right navigation section. The first issue of In Antithesis is currently slated for a June release, barring providential hindrance.
Along with this announcement, we are calling for papers conforming to the specifications outlined on the Journal page. The deadline for submissions is May 31st. As …
-
Knowledge, Attenuated VanTillianism, and a False Dilemma
Yesterday, I did some commenting on a post by Paul Manata entitled “Do All Men Know that God Exists?“.
In this post, he offers a couple possible responses he would consider Van Tillians to potentially offer, tells us he’s an “attenuated” Van Tillian (which is unsurprising, at best); we interacted in the comments for a bit, (complete with his typical ad hominem) and he returns today with a bit of screed, venting about Van Tillians. His problem, apparently, seems to be my “certainty”. Far be it from me to point out that he acts anything but uncertain, but …
-
But you have to start with yourself! (Updated)
Today on the Dividing Line Dr. White took a call on presuppositionalism concerning R.C. Sproul’s objection that we cannot escape from ourselves and hence must start with ourselves in epistemology. Dr. White did not have any problem pointing out the fundamental reason that Sproul is wrong (and inconsistent) by appealing to the theological argument that we are epistemologically tied to God as it were by virtue of our having been created in the image of God. John Calvin notes this right away in his Institutes. Make sure to listen to Dr. White’s answer provided at the link above as …
-
James Anderson's Response to David Reiter on TAG
Some time ago I linked to a summary of and posted some Initial Comments on the Reiter Article.
Shortly thereafter I heard that two different philosophers who have been influenced by Van Til were working on responses to the Reiter article. However, the response is now complete, and was posted today by James Anderson. If I am not mistaken this is the first positive, “peer reviewed journal entry” on the Transcendental Argument for God. I know, I know, some people will argue that Philosophia Christi is not one of the journals that critics of TAG have had in …
-
Apologetic Mirror Objection
David Byron recently commented on this post which concerns TAG and Islam. Rather than letting a rather lengthy comment linger on an old post I have decided to post it here in full. Part of being a good apologist is being aware of common objections to one’s methodology and arguments. This leads to further study and a stronger apologetic. It also equips the apologist to be able to at the very least recognize a particular objection in the context of an apologetic encounter. Byron writes out a helpful description of what has elsewhere been labeled the Apologetic Mirror Problem (AMP). …
-
A Question on Induction from Ben Wallis (Updated)
Now that Ben has clarified his answer to the problem of induction as being one largely similar to the one provided by P.F. Strawson, and now that I have pointed out the many problems with that solution in this post, I can move on to quote a question from Ben that was asked in his last comment.
…Suppose we can’t ground induction in deduction. In that case, why should we refrain from taking inductive inferences to be rational? Why is it that you think justification for a position on, say, the force of gravity on earth, cannot consist of