The Recent Rise of Covenantal Apologetics (6 of 10)

One of the largest contributing factors to the recent rise of covenantal apologetics is, oddly enough, the response of its anti-Christian critics.

Just in the last year or two, podcast after atheistic podcast has trumpeted everything from mere disdain for to the utter defeat of presuppositional apologetics. Podcasts that come to mind are Fundamentally Flawed, Skepticule Record, and Reasonable Doubts. There are others. Militant atheists are also mouthy atheists. On the one hand, they want to dismissively scoff at covenantal apologetics, making up some of the worst puns on “presuppositionalism” you have ever heard. On the other …

Read more

Initial Thoughts on the Virtues of External Critique

Internal Critique

Internal critique is the method whereby a particular position is examined upon the basis of its own presuppositions. Presuppositions are the most basic tenets of a particular position or worldview. Assuming an internal critique is positively successful, the position in question will espouse tenets fully consistent with its presuppositions. Insofar as the critique is negatively successful, the position in question is found wanting due to inconsistencies, arbitrariness, contradictions, and the like.

External Critique

Rather than examining a position upon the basis of its own presuppositions, external critique examines said position in virtue of the presuppositions or derivative tenets …

Read more

The Recent Rise of Covenantal Apologetics (5 of 10)

“Theology matters and theology determines apologetic methodology.” – Dr. James R. White

The entire program of presuppositional apologetics can be summed up in the “need for consistency” challenge constantly set forth by Dr. James R. White of Alpha and Omega Ministries. If one ever wonders where the present day Greg Bahnsen of apologetics is one need look no further than Dr. White. Such a statement might ruffle some feathers, but having followed Dr. White’s ministry for a few years now I believe the statement is substantiated by the ministry delivered to Dr. White by the grace of God.

From C.L. …

Read more

A Friendly Chat With An Atheist

Chris:  Are you a believer?

Atheist:  nope

an atheist

Chris:  Ah.

Well it’s nice to have one of those around every now and then.

We have to get Christians from somewhere after all. 😀

So I presume you have heard the Christian Gospel?

Atheist:  yup

Go to mass… et cetera 😉

Chris:  I’m guessing that you’re joking. 🙂

Atheist:  I am

Chris:  So why are you an atheist?

Atheist:  I don’t think that any spirits exist

be they gods, ghosts or anything else

Chris:  That’s the definition of your position then.

Why do you hold it?

Atheist:  I don’t see …

Read more

The Recent Rise of Covenantal Apologetics (4 of 10)

Happy Birthday Choosing Hats!

If I am going to post anything resembling an attempt to “toot my own horn” I might as well get it done early so that people will forget about it by the time I write on more significant contributing factors to the recent rise of covenantal apologetics.

Choosing Hats was founded by Brian Knapp and Chris Bolt in July of 2008 in an effort to promote Van Tilian presuppositional apologetics at an introductory level and free of charge on the Internet. Choosing Hats is four years old today, and the next issue of the In Antithesis

Read more

The Recent Rise of Covenantal Apologetics (3 of 10)

Covenantal apologetics have virtually no place in the academy.

It’s not that they shouldn’t have a place in the academy. It’s just that they don’t.

But why would we expect anything different? Covenantal apologetics are firmly grounded in the Christian worldview and are used to cast down every thought exemplifying its antithesis. It is not merely that non-Christians will misunderstand or reject covenantal apologetics in an intellectual sense, but rather that they will not even like them. So we should not expect to see covenantal apologetics pulling up a chair next to Naturalistic Atheism or Thomistic Christianity in the …

Read more

Theistic Arguments and the Necessity of God

There are many different types of necessity.

Logical Necessity and the Ontological Argument

A logically necessary entity exists in every possible world. (A “possible world” is just a logically possible state of affairs.) That is, there is no logically possible state of affairs in which a logically necessary entity does not exist.

The ontological argument seeks to demonstrate, among other things, that God is a logically necessary entity. Since God is the greatest possible being, there is no logically possible state of affairs in which God does not exist. It is greater for God to exist in every possible …

Read more

The Arrogance of the “Impossibility of the Contrary”

A lot of people have problems with the “impossibility of the contrary” claim often made as part and parcel of the covenantal or presuppositional apologetic method. A lot of people. And they have problems with it for very different reasons. I will address only two of them here.

The first is exclusivity. To say that anything contrary to some given position is impossible is to make a very bold claim to exclusivity. I am not going to enter into the various senses in which the covenantal apologist might be using the term “impossibility” here. But it will suffice to …

Read more