Archive for the ‘christian apologetics’ Category


There’s a news story that’s trending titled “Muslim migrant boat captain who ‘threw six Christians to their deaths from his vessel because of their religion’ goes on trial for murder.”  Of course the news of what the Muslim captain did to the six Christians are horrifying.  As usual all kinds of comments are spewed over the internet .  You waste your time reading all of it since some of them are just silly.

One comment that I couldn’t believe got 467 votes in eight hours stated the following:

Religious people always say that atheists lack morality, and yet I have never thrown anyone to their deaths.

Now I’m honestly amazed that this comment go so much votes.  It show that there are at least 467 people  out there who think this statement is profound (it is more actually, when one thinks that this is the net amount of votes after people’s downvote).  But for me this comment is sheer folly.  And I’m only responding to this because of how many people liked it.


Read Full Post »


John Frame. The Doctrine of God.  Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, June 1st, 2002. 864 pp.

Rating: 5 out of 5

This book is a great resource on a theology of God.  Those who have read other works by the author John Frame will find him on top of his game here as well.  This is a work that pastors and teachers would turn to as reference even after completing it.  I enjoyed reading this book in two separate instances: once when I was in seminary as something I had to read through rather quickly and the second instance being after seminary at a slower pace as part of my morning routine of devotional-theological readings.  I would recommend the second approach as the best way to read this volume.


Read Full Post »

This post is probably more technical than some of the other responses we wrote answering alleged Bible contradiction but I think it is helpful in demonstrating how a working knowledge of the original language of Scripture is helpful and important.


Today’s post will tackle the question that the Skeptic Annotated Bible pose: “How did David kill Goliath?”

Here’s the two answer they pointed out in which their point is that there is a contradiction:

With a sling only.

(“There was no sword in the had of David.”)

And David put his hand into his bag and took from it a stone and slung it, and struck the Philistine on his forehead. And the stone sank into his forehead, so that he fell on his face to the ground. 50 Thus David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and a stone, and he struck the Philistine and killed him; but there was no sword in David’s hand. (1 Samuel 17:49-50)

He cut off his head with a sword.

Then David ran and stood over the Philistine and took his sword and drew it out of its sheath and killed him, and cut off his head with it. When the Philistines saw that their champion was dead, they fled. (1 Samuel 17:51)

(Note: Scriptural quotation comes from the New American Standard Bible.  What is in bold is the emphasis by the skeptic webpage.)

Also the website also asked “Or did he kill him twice?”

Let’s take a closer look at whether or not there is a contradiction:


Read Full Post »


Here are links related to Presuppositional apologetics gathered between September 8th-14th, 2016.

1.) Greg Bahnsen: Epistemology and Ontology

2.) Van Til Quote: Antithetical Concepts of Possibility

3.) Apologetics Sermon Illustration #36: Doing Math with Dice and Atheism’s Destruction of Knowledge

4.) Armchair debunkers

5.) Read Aloud: “Secular Responses to the Problem of Induction” by James Anderson

6.) What’s Your Worldview? A Broadcast with James Anderson

7.) Calvinistic Cartoons: Atheistic Diagnosis

8.) Van Til’s Critique of Barth’s Christology (Part 1)


Missed the last round up?  Check out the re-blogged post from a friend OR that of Another REBLOG HERE

Read Full Post »

Dr. James Anderson is a Christian philosopher and Presuppositional apologist and Reformed theologian.  Dr. Anderson some years ago has written an essay titled “”Secular Responses to the Problem of Induction.  Recently Anderson’s essay has been read aloud and available on Youtube.  One can listen to them below:

If you want to read this essay in written form you can also access it here.


Read Full Post »



Point: Doctor Cornelius Van Til, the father of Presuppositional apologetics, is famous for asking the following question to those who would attack the Christian faith: “On what foundation rest the guns which he directs against the Christian position?”  Cornelius Van Til was insightful to note that the presuppositions one bring to the discussion about the truth of Christianity matters.  In fact presuppositions are very crucial.  Elsewhere Van Til said,

The issue between believers and non-believers in Christian theism cannot be settled by a direct appeal to “facts” or “laws” whose nature and significance is already agreed upon by both parties to the debate. The question is rather as to what is the final reference-point required to make the “facts” and “laws” intelligible. The question is as to what the “facts” and “laws” really are. Are they what the non-Christian methodology assumes that they are? Are they what the Christian theistic methodology presupposes they are?” (Source)

Thus “The Christian position seeks to make human experience intelligible in terms of the presupposition of God; the non-Christian position seeks to make human experience intelligible in terms of man who is conceived of as ultimate.”  Often many anti-theists and proponents of non-Christian religions that reject the sovereignty of God would believe that chance is ultimate.  Van Til believes a chance universe is self-defeating of knowlege in which chance makes everything unintelligible as he stated in a famous quote:

So hopeless and senseless a picture must be drawn of the natural man’s methodology based as it is upon the assumption that time or chance is ultimate. On his assumption his own rationality is a product of chance. On his assumption even the laws of logic which he employs are products of chance. The rationality and purpose that he may be searching for are still bound to be products of chance. So then the Christian apologist, whose position requires him to hold that Christian theism is really true and as such must be taken as the presupposition which alone makes the acquisition of knowledge in any field intelligible, must join his “friend” in his hopeless gyrations so as to point out to him that his efforts are always in vain. (Source: Cornelius Van Til, The Defense of the Faith (P&R, 1972), p. 102.)

Van Til’s own illustration in the famous quote was the following:

Suppose we think of a man made of water in an infinitely extended and bottomless ocean of water. Desiring to get out of water, he makes a ladder of water. He sets this ladder upon the water and against the water and then attempts to climb out of the water. (Source)

But I think the following illustration below would be a helpful supplement to explain why a chance ultimate universe makes knowledge irrational and unintelligible.


Read Full Post »


The question that the Skeptic Annotated Bible pose is this: “Does God sleep?”

According to the Skeptic Annotated Bible this is the answer they gave which supposedly indicates a contradiction:

God never sleeps.

He will not allow your foot to slip; He who keeps you will not slumber. Behold, He who keeps Israel Will neither slumber nor sleep. (Psalm 121:3-4)

God sometimes sleeps.

Arouse Yourself, why do You sleep, O Lord? Awake, do not reject us forever. (Psalm 44:23)

(Note: Scriptural quotation comes from the New American Standard Bible.  What is in bold is the emphasis by the skeptic webpage.)

Let’s take a closer look at whether or not there is a contradiction:


Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »