Why The Bible Is Necessary For Apologetics: A Brief Reflection On 1 Peter 3.15

/ C. L. Bolt / 0 Comments

Introduction

The study of defending the Christian faith has recently become extremely popular. Bookstores are filled with manuals on how Christians can defend their faith. Usually the books present “facts” from secular writings. The Big Bang Theory, Ancient Greek philosophy, Near Death Experiences, selections from secular Roman historians and even liberal theology are used to try and show unbelievers that Christianity is reasonable. Christians are encouraged to look at these “facts” with unbelievers in a “neutral” way as though God does not exist or the Bible is not His Word. I find this odd.

When we are looking for help …

Read more

“Does God Exist?” My Opening Statement (2006)

/ C. L. Bolt / 2 Comments

Opening Statement
“Does God Exist?”
Central Virginia Community College
February 2006

Thank you all for coming out for the debate and thanks to Alex and Dr. McGee for being willing to help with this. I’d also like to thank my God, in whom we live and move and have our being. I want to make it clear from the start that the God I am talking about today is the God of the Christian scriptures. That’s the only God I care to prove because He is the only God who actually exists. I am happy to join Alex in refuting …

Read more

The failure of unbelief with respect to induction illustrated by Mitch LeBlanc.

/ C. L. Bolt / 2 Comments

Mitch LeBlanc continues to espouse his inconsistencies regarding induction in his most recent post found here – http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/further-thoughts-and-clarifications-on-induction-and-the-christian-god/

Mitch Admits His Problem

He writes, “…I simply mean to suggest that one should be as skeptical about the problem of induction as the problem is skeptical of inductive reasoning itself.”
With this he begs the question. I pointed out that he did so in his previous post and he continues to do so now. The existence of debate regarding a given topic does not entail skepticism. If he is unsure of whether or not there is a Problem of Induction then …

Read more

With A Wave of His Wand: How Mitch LeBlanc Answers the Problem of Induction

/ C. L. Bolt / One Comment

Introduction

Mitch LeBlanc wrote an indirect response to me regarding the Problem of Induction wherein he relied heavily upon Michael Martin to deal with the presuppositionalist utilization of the famous problem. He apparently recognizes, to some extent, the alleged challenge set forth. My response to his post may be found here – http://choosinghats.blogspot.com/2009/09/mitch-leblancs-proposed-solution-to.html . He has now written another post here – http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/inductive-reasoning-and-the-christian-god/ wherein he states that I have missed the point of his previous article. He claims that his post is not intended to be a solution to the Problem of Induction and that it is debatable as to …

Read more

Mitch LeBlanc’s Proposed Solution to the Problem of Induction

/ C. L. Bolt / One Comment

Introduction

Mitch LeBlanc has written a post concerning induction ( found here – http://urbanphilosophy.net/philosophy/inductive-reasoning-and-the-christian-god/ ) in which he writes that “the uniformity of nature (or rather the principle of the uniformity of nature) states that ‘the future will resemble the past’ and is used in inductive reasoning”. He then attempts to describe the difference between deduction and induction and writes, “…in a deductive argument it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false (provided the argument is valid/sound)”. All Mitch need write in his parenthesis is “provided the argument is valid”. If an argument …

Read more