Tag: Scripture
-
Paul Jenkins, Naughty Children, and Hell
Introduction
Somewhat understandably, our friend Paul Jenkins categorizes the discussion of, “whether Hell is ‘eternal conscious punishment’ on the one hand, or ‘annihilation’ on the other” as, “Not just piffle, but risible piffle.”
The alternative that occurs most obviously to me is, “Hell doesn’t exist — it’s a horror story told to children to stop them being naughty.”
One might question how Paul is so dogmatically certain that hell doesn’t exist. Of course it does not matter how certain Paul feels he is with regard to the alleged non-existence of hell if hell does in fact exist. It does …
-
Atheist Justin Scheiber on Bible Translation
After highlighting a difference between the way the NRSV, ESV, NASB, KJB, and WEB translate a particular text of Scripture versus the way the NIV, NLT, and God’s Word “translate” it (This is according to the Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, but note that the second list of versions provided are not all translations. Some are paraphrases, and it can make a difference to this particular objection, but for the sake of brevity I will move on.) Justin Scheiber of Reasonable Doubts writes:
…I should perhaps presume that the ‘real’ Christians have their ducks all in a row – that
-
Atheist Andrew’s Misreading of Exodus 21:20-21 On Beating Slaves
A visiting atheist fanboy of Richard Dawkins named Andrew wrote:
Oh dear – have you not actually read the bible? It clearly says you can beat your slave to death as long as they take longer than three days to die.
Rather than addressing some difficult questions posed to him by Rhology, Andrew jumps immediately into a passage that is typically touted by Internet atheists who want to pretend as though they know the Bible better than most believers by virtue of their having read, say, the Skeptics Bible or visited Evil Bible. Now let’s address Andrew’s misreading of …
-
The Argument from Atheistic Activism: “The Achilles’ Heel of Internet Atheism?” Revisited
Introduction
In a recent post here – https://choosinghats.org/2012/02/the-achilles-heel-of-internet-atheism – I made the following observation:
…It takes somebody really, really … special … to spend hours upon hours blogging, podcasting, and commenting about an imaginary concept of deity with no more intellectual credibility than Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. And yet there are people who do exactly that day after day! Think of all those grown men sitting at their computers wasting their time lashing out at people for believing in God when they could be partying it up before the worms eat them.
Are we really supposed to
-
We’ve Got Mail: The Glory of God and Grounding Objections
Pat Mefford writes:
Recently, I’ve been fascinated by this concept of doing things for the glory of God. It’s an interesting answer to the question, “Why does the Creator bother to create?” but glory is an extrinsic property, one that God cannot ground by himself (one needs an ontologically separate thing to properly glorify that which deserves glory). How does the Presuppositionalist account for a property that God cannot ground but yet, seems dependent on?
While the question is interesting, the assumptions inherent in the question interest me more. First is the odd idea that seems to express that God …
-
Ben Wallis on Van Tilian Presuppositionalism (Updated)
UPDATE: Ben Wallis has edited his post to reflect his take on my concerns. See here – http://benwallis.blogspot.com/2012/02/reasonable-doubtcasters-on-van-tilian.html?showComment=1330427431782#c5897980217578008803
_____________________
I like Ben Wallis, and he takes some really interesting angles in philosophical discussions, but I fear we often talk past one another.
Perhaps I am missing something in Ben’s most recent post, but his comments there appear less than fair. You may read the post in its entirety here – http://benwallis.blogspot.com/2012/02/reasonable-doubtcasters-on-van-tilian.html.
In that post, Wallis praises the recent work of the Reasonable Doubts podcast that pertains to presuppositional apologetics. Essentially, the hosts there appealed to Michael Martin’s TANG, Mitch …
-
We’ve Got Mail: What about various other worldviews?
Matt B writes:
Hello, I’m a Christian and am very fond of presuppositional apologetics, but I’m wondering if you could help me a bit. I feel I can confidently articulate the basic premise of Van Til’s apologetic, and the implications of it for atheistic/polytheistic worldviews, but could you help me explain why this particular apologetic is only applicable to the God of Christianity, rather than various other worldviews (e.g. open theism, deism, agnosticism, etc.)? Thank you, your answer will be much appreciated.
Open theism may be dealt with philosophically, but since open theists make a claim to our God and …
-
Praxis Presup: Episode 20
Chris makes some initial comments on the second podcast in the series on presuppositional apologetics at Reasonable Doubts.…
-
Reasonable Doubts About Devastating Arguments
…Jeremy says:
There are plenty of arguments our listeners mentioned that we didn’t get to in this episode. Some that are just as devastating as the ones we did provide. Which bible are we presupposing the truth of? What about other valid TAG arguments that arrive at different conclusions? How can all other possible sources for logic be eliminated? So many problems with presuppositionalism, so little time. But we will be addressing more of these critiques and talking about our atheistic foundations in a near-future episode. At the moment we are switching gears