Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘meta-apologetics’ Category

richard spencer apologetics

The following are four video lectures related to epistemology, the rationality of biblical Christianity, classic theistic proofs and modern evidence for the biblical Christian worldview and an introduction to Van Tillian apologetics.  It was presented between the end of May to June 2015 over at Grace Valley Christian Center near University of California, Davis.  According to the church’s website here is the biographical sketch of the speaker:

Dr. Spencer is an elder and minister at GVCC and has led GVCC’s Faith and Reason Series. He is Professor Emeritus of the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) at UC Davis, and a Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE). He received his B.S.E.E. from San Jose State University and his M.S. and Ph.D. from Stanford University. He was a faculty member for 25 years, served as the vice chair of the department, and held an endowed professorship. He has been married to his wife, Patti, since 1979 and has three children and two grandchildren. He has been a member of GVCC since giving his life to Christ in 1992.

Enjoy!

Read Full Post »

Note: I had a long day on Friday so I wasn’t able to post yesterday on Veritas Domain.

journal of biblical apologetics

 

The Journal of Biblical Apologetics was published between the Fall of 2000 to Spring of 2008 and edited by Dr. Robert Morey.  While I do have some reservation with endorsing everything Robert Morey has to say, nevertheless in the past I have found some of the things that Dr. Morey said to be helpful.  I also appreciated The Journal of Biblical Apologetics because the Journal also featured other solid Christian Scholars writing on various topics.  There are also reprints of articles by well known apologists like Gordon Clark, Walter Martin, etc.

The Journal is now available online for free as a PDF!  You can download them below:

 

What were the different topics that the Journal of Biblical Apologetics‘ addressed?

  1. Volume 1: Natural Theology
  2. Volume 2: General Theism
  3. Volume 3: Roman Catholicism
  4. Volume 4: Roman Catholicism
  5. Volume 5: Islam
  6. Volume 6: Islam
  7. Volume 7: Islam
  8. Volume 8: Islam
  9. Volume 9: Natural Theology

May God’s people be blessed by them!

Read Full Post »

Presuppositional Dispensationalism This is an expansion of an “index” to a previous series on Calvinistic Dispensational Presuppositionalism I had about two years ago.  I’m trying to have a “one stop shop” page that has links to everything online related to the tiny niche of Calvinistic Dispensational Presuppositionalism.  Bookmark it as I will add to this page from time to time! HISTORICAL CONSIDERATION

PERSPECTIVALISM: INTER-RELATIONSHIP OF ESCHATOLOGY, APOLOGETICS AND HERMENEUTICS 

INTERVIEWS

THESIS AND DISSERTATIONS

ARTICLES, BLOG SERIES AND OTHER WRITINGS

MULTIMEDIA TEACHING RESOURCES ON PRESUPPOSITIONALISM BY DISPENSATIONALISTS

APOLOGETICS TACTICS

REVIEWS

Read Full Post »

Dustin Segers is a contributor to Triablogue, an awesome blog.

dustin segers apologetics

Recently there was a post on Youtube of a talk that he did back in 2006.  Still, it’s worthwhile for those new to Presuppositional apologetics to go over.

Enjoy!

Read Full Post »

What follows is a review from a presuppositionalist’s perspective.

This is a good book when it comes to seeing how the leading Christian apologist would go about articulating their respect school of apologetics, and their critiques of the other schools.  The editor Steven Cowan is to be commended in the introduction of giving a brief sypnosis of what each views are, for those who might not be familiar with the meta-apologetics debate.

In the first chapter by Classical apologist William Lane Craig, I was taken aback by Craig’s discussion of the witness of the Holy Spirit as self-authenticating (29).  Reading his chapter, it was a surprise to read of how he articulated much of what seems to be a partial embrace of Reformed Theology’s implication towards apologetics!  He shows in his section an awareness and appreciation of Reformed epistemology in general, and Alvin Plantinga’s work specifically, with his reference here and elsewhere in the book of properly basic beliefs, etc.  Seeing how he distinguish between why one believe Christianity to be true (inward testimony of the Spirit) and SHOWING Christianity to be true (where the role of reason comes in), I wished he explained the realm of reason (what one’s show to others) and Spirit (inward testimony) with more Scriptural reference brought to bear.  With his emphasis of facts and evidence, I wished he had gotten further to discuss what he believe the nature of facts mean, and whether or not the many things he has taken for granted such as probability (48), induction and the intelligibility of historical research can make sense apart from a Christian worldview.

Coming to Gary Habermas chapter on Evidentialism, the thing I most appreciated was the discussion that Christianity enjoy much evidence.  I have grown up in the faith appreciating much of his works defending the resurrection, but in his interaction with naturalistic assumption of non-Christians when it comes to dismissing the Christian interpretation of the resurrection, I think was rather naïve in the sense. He believes a minimal approach can be sustained, and I question whether it will always be true this approach will vindicate Christianity when “it meets critics on their own (common) grounds, using their presuppositions and their methodology” (115-116).  What if the criteria of the nonbeliever and their historical methodology such as naturalistic history have ruled out a resurrection or made it impossible for the resurrection to be historical?  His response to naturalism was that it dismisses the ‘facts’ of the resurrection, but it is one’s philosophy of facts (in this case, naturalism) that produces ‘facts’, and for the naturalists, a resurrection would hence be ruled out as not being a fact.  These critics then can not be met by sharing common grounds, and then using a “minimal” approach; rather, Presuppositionalism with it’s emphasis of analysis of presuppositions and pointing out self-defeating epistemology.

Another area that was a highlight of the book for me was reading the response towards Presuppositionalism by the other schools.  Reading Craig’s short response, the response did not seem to really be a response from a Classical perspective but rather as Craig sharing his opinion that Plantinga has superceded Van Til, something one would expect from the Reformed Epistemology camp instead!  Habermas critique began with his comment that Frame was more open to dialogue with unbelievers more than Van Til (237), but this opening reveals his lack of understanding VanTil was open to dialogue.

Purchase: Westminster | Amazon

Read Full Post »