Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for February, 2009

CLICK HERE FOR PART I

wolfblowsbricks

In an earlier essay, I made some observation of the weakness of a typical Christian objection towards Presuppositional Apologetics.[1] In this essay, I will likewise do the same with an atheist ranting against Presuppositional Apologetics. If the typical Christian ranting against Presuppositional Apologetics is really bad, then the atheist case is even worst. No arguments are constructed in a vacuum, and when the atheist grounds his objections on the basis of atheism, it simply compounds the problem further

In response to a Presuppositional critique of atheism by Dr. Jason Lisle, where Lisle argues that atheism is irrational[2], and an atheist wrote:

“The sheer absurdity of the argument astonishes.”

What exactly is the “sheer absurdity” of the Presuppositionalist’s argument which “astonishes” him? The atheist goes on to say,

“In the early age of human scientific thought, it was supposed that through simply thinking things through logically, truths could be deduced about the universe without empirical evidence.

The ancients could prove things geometrically through scientific reasoning without seeing actual squares or triangles; consequently, they imagined they could lay back and arrive to perfect truth without ever conducting a single experiment or observing a single phenomenon — a priori reasoning, mere armchair ratiocination.

Back then, to assert the existence of a deity required no physical evidence, no observed proof, nothing in support of any kind other than clever philosophical suppositions.

He then closes his ranting with this jab to the Presuppositionalist:

That was over two thousand years ago.

Evolve.”

Cheap shots are easy, but critical observations are worth far more. The following are some observations:

1.) To begin with, his entire ranting did not interacted with the argument that Lisle presented. The atheist failed to deal neither with the Presuppositionalist’s premises nor with the structure of the Presuppositionalist’s argument.

2.) Having failed to interact with the actual Presuppositionalist’s argument itself, the atheist instead substituted that with a discussion of an underlying issue: the issue of what would constitute legitimate proofs. In other words, the thrust of the atheist objection is actually epistemological in nature. Since this is the case, his epistemology (theory of knowledge) must be subject to criticism as well.

3.) The atheist has a disdain for how “truths could be deduced about the universe without empirical evidence.” It is apparent that the atheist does not like non-empirical epistemology when he speaks of them in a derogatory way as “mere armchair ratiocination” and as offering “nothing in support of any kind other than clever philosophical suppositions.” In essence, the atheist is an empiricist in his epistemology.

4.) His assertions combine with his epistemology brings more problems upon him. As an empiricist, can he offer empirical proofs to his claim that “In the early age of human scientific thought, it was supposed that through simply thinking things through logically, truths could be deduced about the universe without empirical evidence”? For a person who is so big on empirical proofs, he fails to usher any empirical evidence but talk in generalities.

5.) His historical claim of what the ancients “thought” is also self-contradictory. The atheist asserted that “The ancients could prove things geometrically through scientific reasoning without seeing actual squares or triangles; consequently, they imagined they could lay back and arrive to perfect truth without ever conducting a single experiment or observing a single phenomenon.” One has to wonder if the guy even knows what science is. Since science is empirical in nature in its study of the physical world, any scientific endeavor is by definition empirical. Thus, scientific reasoning is heavily empirical. Yet, how can the atheist assert that “the ancients could prove things geometrically through scientific reasoning” but they supposedly did so “without ever conducting a single experiment or observing a single phenomenon”? This is a contradictory and meaningless statement.

6.) The above observation is good evidence refuting his denial that “through simply thinking things through logically, truths could be deduced about the universe without empirical evidence.” By the power of sanctified reasoning of the atheist’s self-contradictory statement one can deduce something “about the universe without empirical evidence”, namely that this atheist claim (made in this universe) is irrational! One must reject this atheist’s epistemology, and his irrational rejection of non-empirical logical deduction

7.) As an empiricist, has the atheist seen, taste, touch, smell or heard with his own ears that the ancients “imagined they could lay back and arrive to perfect truth without ever conducting a single experiment or observing a single phenomenon — a priori reasoning, mere armchair ratiocination”? How does he know empirically that the ancients “imagined” this, when “imagination” and thought is not physical in its essence, thereby ultimately not verifiable through empirical sensation?

8.) Continuing with the above observation, a possible defense the atheist could put up is that he empirically knows what the ancients believe based upon ancient record. If written ancient record would satisfy the atheist’s criteria of empirical evidence, then if he is to be consistent with his epistemology he would allow the Bible as an “empirical” data, and cannot rule that the Christians lack empirical evidence per se.

9.) Yet, how does he know these historical records are reliable, that the writers were telling the truth of their actual thoughts and “imagination” rather than simply telling lies? In other words, what justification (specifically, empirical justification) does this atheist have that there is a correspondence between what people write and their actual thoughts or “imagination”? Remember that whatever reason he has to justify the correspondence can not be “a priori reasoning,” which this atheist sees nothing more as “mere armchair ratiocination.” However he attempts to justify this thesis would require more than empirical proofs but with “clever philosophical suppositions.”

10.) Again, how can he empirically know what the ancients thought when he was not around in the ancients “without ever conducting a single experiment or observing a single phenomenon”? The atheist is the very thing he despises: he assumes things yet “required no physical evidence, no observed proof, nothing in support of any kind other than clever philosophical suppositions.”

Conclusion

The atheist ranting ended with the secular humanist altar call: “Evolve”. But the reasoning he displayed against Presuppositional Apologetics is not good. In fact, they are pathetic. I am not questioning his reasoning skills so much as his ethical relationship to the GOD He denies but the Bible says he knows about (Romans 1:18). How low and irrational will this atheist go to reject God which Presuppositional Apologetics is arguing for? The atheist needs to repent, and be right with God ethically, which will save his soul from God’s eternal wrath towards sin and redeem his rational life as well.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Here’s the Shepherd’s Conference Seminar Schedule

For those of you guys who don’t know, I think The Shepherd’s Conference is the best conference to invite your pastor to….

Here’s a link to their website: http://www.shepherdsfellowship.org/SC/Default.aspx

Wednesday, March 04, 2009

Time Session Title Teacher
1:30 PM – 2:45 PM Ask Our Elders
An interactive forum on practical ministry issues
Rob Iverson
1:30 PM – 2:45 PM From Moses to Malachi
How to preach the Old Testament
Irv Busenitz
1:30 PM – 2:45 PM How Firm a Foundation
A philosophy of ministry built upon the text of scripture
Tom Patton
1:30 PM – 2:45 PM Preaching with Purity
Consecrating your heart as you prepare for the pulpit
Rick Holland
1:30 PM – 2:45 PM Restoration Hardware
Understanding the goal of church discipline
Bill Shannon
1:30 PM – 2:45 PM What is an Evangelical?
Examining the ever-changing definition
Phil Johnson
1:30 PM – 2:45 PM Why Are We Losing Our Youth?
And what you church can do to prevent it
Austin Duncan

Thursday, March 05, 2009

Time Session Title Teacher
2:00 PM – 3:15 PM A Multitude of Counselors
How to train lay leadership to assist you in biblical counseling
John Street
2:00 PM – 3:15 PM Making Waves without Sinking the Ship
How biblical leadership both creates and resolves conflict
Rob Iverson
2:00 PM – 3:15 PM Missional Madness
Reclaiming the Great Commission in your local church
Jesse Johnson
2:00 PM – 3:15 PM Preaching with Precision
Studying the passage with accuracy and care
Bill Barrick
2:00 PM – 3:15 PM Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs
Striving for a balanced approach to music in worship
Clayton Erb
2:00 PM – 3:15 PM Servants, Not Spectators
Motivating and mobilizing members into the work of the ministry
Brent Small
2:00 PM – 3:15 PM The Gospel According to James
Keys to preaching this life-transforming letter
Will Varner
2:00 PM – 3:15 PM When Absence Makes the Heart Grow Fonder
Cultivating your church’s passion for its missionaries
John Glass

Thursday, March 05, 2009

Time Session Title Teacher
3:45 PM – 5:00 PM A Family for the Fatherless
Living out the gospel through adoption and mercy ministry
Mark Tatlock
3:45 PM – 5:00 PM A New Kind of Fool
Assessing the New Atheism from a biblical perspective
Nathan Busenitz
3:45 PM – 5:00 PM Authentic or Counterfeit?
What the Bible teaches about faith healing
Richard Mayhue
3:45 PM – 5:00 PM Enseñando la Palabra de Dios con Eficacia
Principios básicos de comunicación y enseñanza bíblica (In Spanish)
Henry Tolopilo
3:45 PM – 5:00 PM Families in the Fishbowl
What every pastor and elder needs to know about raising his kids
Chris Hamilton
3:45 PM – 5:00 PM Preaching with Purpose
Crafting an effective sermon that stays faithful to the text
Tom Pennington
3:45 PM – 5:00 PM Throw Out Your Fleece
A guide to biblical decision making
Jon Rourke

Friday, March 06, 2009

Time Session Title Teacher
10:45 AM – 12:00 PM An Army of One
The call to cultivate unity in your local church
Kurt Gebhards
10:45 AM – 12:00 PM Even Unto the Least of These
Ministering effectively to those with Autism, Downs Syndrome, and other special needs
Rick McLean
10:45 AM – 12:00 PM How to Save the Planet
Developing a biblical model for world missions
Kevin Edwards
10:45 AM – 12:00 PM Just the FAQs
Answering the common ministry questions that we have received over the years
Rick Holland
10:45 AM – 12:00 PM O Worship the King
Igniting a passion for corporate worship in your church
Andy Snider
10:45 AM – 12:00 PM Preaching with Passion
Proclaiming the sermon with clarity and conviction
Alex Montoya
10:45 AM – 12:00 PM The Gospel According to Muhammad
Addressing the fallacies of Islam
Bill Barrick

Read Full Post »

In  Worldnet Daily, “Financial Fix? Abolish the Fed, says congressman; Paul: Constitution Requires coin based on gold, silver” writes that Ron Paul advocates several changes, among them the removal of the Federal Reserve Board. Though I have not come to any decision myself, I’m not sure if giving control to Congress would fare any better. 

Ron Paul argues that even the current Federal Chairman, Bernanke admitted in a speechthat the Federal Reserve was responsible for the Great Depression. Though I have not finished reading it, I believe the critical point was that monetary policy caused the Great Depression. However, this does not mean that only the Federal Reserve can make bad monetary decisions.

For me, the underlying issue becomes who can control monterary policy better. Ron Paul argues that because the Constitution gives Congress the power coin and control the value of currency, not a centralist-private bank interested in their own income. Although I have not looked into the constitutionality of this, based on Congress current track record with the economic stimulus package, I’ll continue to be quite skeptical that Congress could do any better.

Read Full Post »

In the Wall Street Journal article, “U.S. eyes Large Stake in Citi: Taxpayers could own up to 40% of Bank’s Common Stocks: Diluting Value of Shares,” CitiGroup has been talking to the  U.S. government about increasing the government’s ownership of Citigroup’s stock to as much as 40%. Since last Fall, the Treasuary Department has put $25 billion into CitiGroup on three seperate instances, in the form of preferred shares and warrants, a type of security issued by a corporation giving the holder the right to purchase a certain amount of common stock at a stated price.

Read Full Post »

The Shepherd’s Conference is coming soon!

Here is the schedule for 2009:

Wednesday, March 04, 2009

Time Event
8:00 AM – 10:00 AM Conference Registration
10:00 AM – 11:30 AM General Session 1 – John MacArthur
11:30 AM – 1:30 PM Lunch
1:30 PM – 2:45 PM Seminar Session
2:45 PM – 3:15 PM Break
3:15 PM – 4:30 PM General Session 2 – Tom Pennington
4:30 PM – 7:00 PM Dinner
7:00 PM – 9:30 PM General Session 3 – John MacArthur

Thursday, March 05, 2009

Time Event
9:00 AM – 10:15 AM General Session 4 – Rick Holland
10:15 AM – 10:45 AM Break
10:45 AM – 12:00 PM General Session 5 – John MacArthur
12:00 PM – 2:00 PM Lunch
2:00 PM – 3:15 PM Seminar Session
3:15 PM – 3:45 PM Break
3:45 PM – 5:00 PM Seminar Session
5:00 PM – 7:00 PM Dinner
7:00 PM – 8:30 PM General Session 6 – Al Mohler

Friday, March 06, 2009

Time Event
9:00 AM – 10:15 AM General Session 7 – Phil Johnson
10:15 AM – 10:45 AM Break
10:45 AM – 12:00 PM Seminar Session
12:00 PM – 2:00 PM Lunch
2:00 PM – 4:00 PM General Session 8 – Steve Lawson
4:00 PM – 7:00 PM Dinner
7:00 PM – 8:30 PM General Session 9 – John MacArthur

Saturday, March 07, 2009

Time Event
9:00 AM – 9:00 PM Local Attractions & Activities

Sunday, March 08, 2009

Time Event
8:30 AM – 12:00 PM The Lord’s Day at Grace Community Church
2:30 PM – 4:00 PM Vesper Communion Service

Read Full Post »

In the liberal Western world we live in today, you would think that almost every freedom of speech and assembly is protected,

But the hypocrisy knows no limit…the double standards!

Those who speak about the danger of Radical Islam is not allowed to travel because their speech is hateful, but the freedom of threatening demonstration of radical Islam is looked the other way

Throwing a shoe at an American President is praised but those who throw a shoe against the flag of Hamas would receive physical threats and then get attacked at San Francisco State University!

So attacking cowardly British Cops in an anti-Israel conflict demonstration is met with no reprecussion, but to practice the first admendment of passing out anti-abortion literature would result in police arrest despite later having no charges pressed…

This is the West…anything of Christianity is typically opposed and concession towards Radical Islam is giving way…

Is this signs of things to come? If so, let us keep evangelizing!

Read Full Post »

aasiya-hassanOrchard Park police are investigating a particularly gruesome killing, the beheading of a woman, after her husband — an influential member of the local Muslim community — reported her death to police Thursday.

Police identified the victim as Aasiya Z. Hassan, 37. Detectives have charged her husband, Muzzammil Hassan, 44, with second-degree murder.

Muzzammil Hassan, right, founder of Bridges TV, is charged with murder in the beheading of his wife, Aasiya Hassan, left, in Orchard Park.

Btw, Muzzammil Hassan is the founder of Bridges TV. The purpose of Bridges TV is to potray Muslims and Islam in a positive light after 9/11. I guess they are not reporting this.

Daniel Pipes gives a good commentary on the whole event.

Here’s a link to all the commentaries on Quranic and Hadith verses on murdering, violence and terrorism.

Books on Islam,

islam-1 islam-21 islam-3

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »