In our post “How to Handle Bible Contradictions” I talked about how worldview matters concerning alleged Bible contradictions:
Discussing Bible contradictions doesn’t happen in a vacuum…worldviews shapes one’s interpretation of what are evidences, facts, and the laws of thoughts.
Because worldview matters we must also be conscious of not just refuting Bible contradictions but also whether the skeptics’ worldview even allow for the intelligibility and meaningfulness of talking about “contradictions” or whether the skeptics’ worldview is a self-defeater and undermine their whole enterprise:
So its worth exploring whether a skeptics’ worldview can even make the laws of logic intelligible. If their own worldview destroys the laws of logic, then there’s no place for them to even critique and say the Bible is problematic by being contradictory in the first place. Of course worldview apologetics doesn’t take away the place of examining alleged Bible contradictions and refuting them. But we must not forget that worldviews are important and that if one is arguing for a particular worldview or the rejection of a worldview based upon the claim that the Bible has contradictions, then Presuppositional apologetics must be brought to bear.
Having thus far refuted 70 alleged Bible contradictions from the Skeptic Annotated Bible (SAB) on this blog I thought it would be fair to probe whether the worldview of the author would undermine his own project of the Skeptic Annotated Bible. What I’m asking here is a famous question asked by theologian Cornelius Van Til: “On what foundation rest the guns which he directs against the Christian position?” Is it going to be a good foundation or will it be bad ground for his “artillery?”
(more…)
Read Full Post »
The Domain for Truth 