Archive for the ‘Topical’ Category

Late March 2018 Presuppositional Apologetics’ links

Posted: April 12, 2018 by rickyroldan in Topical

Advertisements

Free Greg Bahnsen Apologetics Course from Gospel Coalition

Posted: February 1, 2018 by rickyroldan in Topical

Powerful

The Domain for Truth

Choosing Hats has brought to my attention Justin Taylor’s blog post on how Van Til might be the most important Christian thinker after Calvin here.

I thought it was appropriate to point out another “Van Til” thing over at the Gospel Coalition website.  They have a four part lecture series from Greg Bahnsen back in 1994 that is free and available for downloading.  I don’t know how long they have been up there for but I just recently found them!  Enjoy.

Van Tilian Apologetics, Part 1 of 4

Greg Bahnsen | Jan 01, 1994 | 1 Peter 3:15-16 | Category: Courses
Van Tilian Apologetics, Part 2 of 4
Greg Bahnsen | Jan 01, 1994 | Category: Courses
Van Tilian Apologetics, Part 3 of 4
Greg Bahnsen | Jan 01, 1994 | Colossians 2:3-4 | Category: Courses

View original post 6 more words


We start with Scripture as our highest authority in ALL things not mere reason. That includes apologetics.

“If we truly want to help men’s consciences so that they are not gripped by perpetual doubt, we must derive the authority of Scripture from a higher source than human reasoning, evidence or conjecture. We must, that is, base it on the inner witness of the Holy Spirit.

Although Scripture’s own majesty is enough to command our reverence, it really begins to affect us only when it is sealed in our hearts by the Holy Spirit. Being illumined by his power, we no longer believe on the strength of our own or of others’ judgment that Scripture is from God. Above and beyond all human judgment we conclude without question that it is given to us from the mouth of God himself, through the ministry of men. It is as if, in Scripture, we beheld with our own eyes the very essence of God. We cease, therefore, to look for proofs and probabilities on which to base our judgment; instead, we subject our judgment and intellect to Scripture, as to a source so high as to rule out the need for judgment. Not because we are like some who thoughtlessly embrace unfamiliar things only to tire of them once they become better known; but because we are very sure that in Scripture we have the unassailable truth. Nor because we are like the ignorant who are in the habit of surrendering their minds to superstition; but because we feel that in Scripture the express power of deity is displayed, kindling in us the desire to give conscious and willing obedience more powerfully than if only human will or knowledge were involved.

This, then, is a conviction which does not require reasons. Nevertheless it is also a knowledge which is based upon a very sound reason, since our mind has a firmer and surer place to rest than in any set of reasons. It is, finally, a feeling which can only spring from heavenly revelations. Here I am talking of nothing else than what every believer experiences in himself, except that my words do not do justice to so worthy a theme, and are most inadequate as an explanation.

Unless we have a higher and firmer certainty than any human judgement can provide, there is no point proving the authority of Scripture by rational argument: it cannot be established on the basis of the church’s consent nor can it be confirmed by other evidences. For if this foundation is not first laid, it is bound to remain in abeyance. Once, however, we obediently accept Scripture as we should, and place it beyond all doubt, the reasons which before were not strong enough to impart certainty to our hearts will now appear as valuable aids.”

– John Calvin, The Institutes of the Christian Religion. p.20-21 (John White’s translation of 1541 version)

Transcendental Argumentation

Posted: January 11, 2018 by rickyroldan in Topical

Genius

Cornelius Van Til

We have already indicated that the Christian method uses neither the inductive nor the deductive method as understood by the opponents of Christianity, but that it has elements of both induction and of deduction in it, if these terms are understood in a Christian sense. Now when these two elements are combined, we have what is meant by a truly transcendental argument.

A truly transcendental argument takes any fact of experience which it wishes to investigate, and tries to determine what the presuppositions of such a fact must be, in order to make it what it is. An exclusively deductive argument would take an axiom such as that every cause must have an effect, and reason in a straight line from such an axiom, drawing all manner of conclusions about God and man. A purely inductive argument would begin with any fact and seek in a straight line for a…

View original post 149 more words


Dr. Bahnsen at his best

The Domain for Truth

In my opinion Greg Bahnsen was one of the best debater among the school of Presuppositional apologetics  He is still one of my favorite popularizer of the apologetics’ methodology of his mentor Cornelius Van Til.  There’s a two page PDF titled “Summary of Presuppositional Apologetic Method by Greg Bahnsen” available here.  Someone has put these words with some music as background as a short three part video series which we feature below:

If you want to learn more of Bahnsen and Presuppositional apologetics check out our posts Free Greg Bahnsen Apologetics Course from Gospel Coalition and Greg Bahnsen vs Gordon Stein Mp3.

View original post

Greg Bahnsen: Critique of Natural Theology

Posted: January 9, 2018 by rickyroldan in Topical

Excellent

The Domain for Truth

This is a lecture by Greg Bahnsen, a Presuppositional apologist who have made a contribution by popularizing the apologetics of Cornelius Van Til and “taking it to streets.”

I need to watch this later.

View original post

John Frame Quote On How Love Require the Laws of Logic

Posted: January 9, 2018 by rickyroldan in Topical

Loving from a logical perspective. Good stuff!

The Domain for Truth

love-4

Yesterday I posted a critical look at two Fuller Seminary’s professors’ argument that Jesus was not for carefully reasoned arguments.  I want to balance that by saying that just because I argue that reasoning is important that does not mean it is okay to be rigorous with our reasoning and not have love.  Both logic and love are compatible.  In fact if we love others it require us to adhere to and use the laws of logic appropriately!  And when we use the laws of logic, as Christians we ought to use it lovingly for the other person.

Here’s John Frame’s quote from the Doctrine of the Knowledge of God that reflect one way there is an inter-relationship between love and the laws of logic:

Perhaps you are beginning to see what a practical science logic is or at least should be!  Love for our brethren requires careful thought…

View original post 141 more words