Apologetics to the Glory of God

Tag: presuppositionalism

  • No Place To Stand

    People have repeatedly called my attention to three posts by Mitch LeBlanc at www.urbanphilosophy.net wherein he makes a “case against presuppositionalism”. There are reasons I have put off writing anything about them other than not having a great deal of time. The arguments contained in the posts are in fact not what they claim to be (arguments against presuppositionalism), but are arguments against the Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God. The arguments presented do not originate with Mitch at all, a fact he readily admits, but are arguments familiar to many presuppositionalists that have been rehashed. Some of the …

  • Jeff Downs and Presuppositional Apologetics Resources

    Recall my post on the Groothuis review of Collision. Jeff Downs also mentioned the review in a post over at Alpha and Omega Ministries that is worth a read. Ever aware of presuppositional resources especially as provided by Westminster Theological Seminary he also provided links to some videos that I have not seen before, one of which I have reposted here.

    …

  • When I Use a Word …

    ‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.’

    ‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

    ‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master – that’s all.’

    For those of you who have read Alice in Wonderland, this exchange between Alice and Humpty Dumpty may ring a bell.  I know it rings a bell with me, because it has been “used” against me in many discussions/debates I have had about God, …

  • 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 …

  • Faint Inconsistencies and Heightened Sensitivity to the Obvious

    One of the difficult things about arguing against a presuppositionalist is that the use of the presuppositional method necessitates an emphasis upon discerning contradictions within a worldview even when those contradictions are implied by a manner of speaking utilized by an individual. Two immediately apparent dangers associated with such an approach are that of finding contradictions where none exist and that of revealing one’s inconsistencies through the habit of speech. The latter may be spoken of in a positive sense and an example given in the case of a naturalist ascribing intentionality to nature. Heightened sensitivity to such error stems …

  • Collision – A Brief Review

    I received my copy of Collision yesterday from Amazon, but didn’t get a chance to watch it until this evening.  I must say I was captivated throughout the entire 90 minutes.  Doug Wilson and Christopher Hitchens are the two “characters” (which is a truly accurate characterization) of this documentary/debate/discussion that left me wishing I was present in-person for the interchanges between them, instead of having to watch it replayed without a chance to interact with either of them.  Both are intelligent, witty, quick on their feet, and passionate about their opposing beliefs.

    Doug Wilson is a Presuppositionalist who, in …

  • 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

    …

  • Debate In Planning Stage With Mitch LeBlanc of Urban Philosophy

    Mitchell LeBlanc is a Philosophy and Religion student at the University of Toronto. Though entering University with intentions to become a priest, he found that philosophical training led him to atheism.

    Of the presuppositional apologetic method, Mitch writes:

    “The implication is that presuppositionalism is bad philosophy in a manner akin to Young Earth Creationism being pseudo-science. In many regards, it is accurate to say that presuppositionalism is to the philosophy of religion what creationism is to biology.”

    Mitch and I have been in contact with each other in order to plan a debate. We cannot guarantee when exactly it will …

  • More Mitch, Moreland

    In a recent post Mitch LeBlanc accuses me of blundering and misunderstanding apologetics. I consider these extremely strong claims coming from someone who argues as inconsistently regarding apologetics as Mitch does.

    Mitch LeBlanc has been writing comments on my posts regarding apologetic methodology in which he attempts to actually defend the method even though as far as I know he claims to be an atheist and rejects the traditional arguments for the existence of God. Mitch often ranges well beyond the scope of a topic in responding to it; that this is the case may be seen in his presentation …