DEBATE: Apologetics Methodology Presuppositionalism vs Evidentialism

Christians are called to share the gospel. Many evangelists try to throw evidence at people to convince them of the truth of Christianity.

While evidence does point to the truth of Christianity and the revelation of God, people will always interpret evidence according to their worldview. So, the non-believer will take evidence presented and claim it is evidence for THEIR worldview. The non-believer will also incorrectly assume they can justify laws of logic, truth, morality, and induction without the One True God, who revealed Himself in creation, in scripture, and in Jesus.

I really enjoyed reading the article below where I got the following quote:

“Even when/if the classical or evidentialist apologist begins with a Christian worldview, both approaches, even combined end up falling victim to the deserved title of “god of the gaps” arguments. Let’s suppose that a Christian provides a convincing argument for the existence of God, such that the debate opponent surrenders. The question that follows is “which God?” From here we cannot really get to Jesus Christ, because this involves proving the Scriptures according to Christianity are from God, before we could ever get to arguments for the resurrection of Christ.”

https://presupp101.wordpress.com/2019/04/30/debate-apologetics-methodology-presuppositionalism-vs-evidentialism/

Presuppositionalism 101

Hello faithful readers and guests, here recently I decided to participate in somewhat of a formal debate with another Calvinist on the subject of Apologetics methodology. I confess to being reluctant (for a number of reasons), I turned him down several times, but he persisted to hint and nudge over a period of months, and so I finally gave in.

Here below is my (rather short) opening statement, with a link to more of the (more detailed) debate on christianforums.com below. So far I have completed the first round, and thinking about the direction I might take for the second. Comments, thoughts, etc. are welcome and appreciated.


Brother Mark Kennedy and I have agreed upon a friendly debate on the subject of apologetics, more specifically apologetic methodology. Mark will be making the case for Evidential Apologetics, while I make the case for Presuppositional Apologetics.

The format will be as follows:

View original post 1,150 more words

Advertisements

Replacing Darwin

Good video on the reason Darwin’s theory is no longer valid:

New information!

Creation Bunch

The New Origin of Species

by Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson

Science has come a long way since Darwin made his claims in the 1800s. Several remarkable scientific discoveries have been made that shed new light on the earth’s origins. In addition, much of the evidence Darwin presented for his argument no longer seems like clear evidence for evolution. What if Darwin was looking at the same evidence today using modern science; would his conclusions be the same? Could modern scientific discoveries overthrow Darwin’s reign? Watch this talk to find out how recent findings are rewriting a century and a half of “settled science.” Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson (Ph.D Cell and Developmental Biology from Harvard University, Research Biologist) presents “Replacing Darwin: The New Origin of Species”.

image credit: Original artwork based on “Replacing Darwin: The New Origin of Species” book cover

View original post

21 Reasons to Believe the Earth is Young

God’s revelation is sufficient to explain reality. Because of God’s revelation we have justification to perform and trust science

Creation Bunch

Abundant evidence exists

by Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

The Bible implies that the Earth is around 6,000 – 10,000 years old, while the conventional belief held by many is that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Is the Bible wrong about the age of the Earth? Abundant evidence exists from the disciplines of paleontology, archaeology, geology, astrophysics, and geophysics which supports the biblical time frame, while refuting deep time.

The age of the Earth, according to naturalists and old-Earth advocates, is 4.5 billion years. Young-Earth [or Biblical] creationists contend that the Earth is on the order of thousands, not billions, of years old. Is there evidence to support the young-Earth creationists’ premise?

First, as we have shown elsewhere, the biblical narrative implies that the Universe was created with an immediate appearance of age in many ways. Adam and Eve were not mere zygotes, but walking, talking, working, and procreating individuals…

View original post 563 more words

Responding to Skeptics

What God reveals, we can be certain about

sixdaysblog

Over at Premier Christianity, geologist and priest Michael Roberts provides 10 questions to ask a young earth creationist. Old earth creationists and evolutionists have been asking these same questions for decades, but it’s as if Roberts thinks he’s the first to come up with them. On the contrary, young earth creationists have answered these questions for as long as anyone has thought to ask them. I’ll link to a response by Creation Ministries International, and then provide my own, responding to what I think is Robert’s main contention.

At the heart of these ten questions is whether or not the Bible really addresses geology and the age of the earth, and if it really matters. Roberts (and other evolutionists) wants to convince us there’s a huge majority of educated people, including scientists, who believe in God, evolution, and an earth that’s 4.6 billion years old. In other words, he’s…

View original post 1,698 more words

What Does the Rest of the Bible Say About Genesis?

Scripture is clear: there is no room for billions of years, evolution, or death/disease/suffering prior to the rebellion of Adam.

You do not need an astrophysicist or special guru to explain their radical personal interpretations of the Bible to you.

Read the Word and stay involved in a body of believers who trust God’s special revelation. The revelation of God contains the very words of life.

Creation Bunch

Using scripture to interpret scripture

by Thomas Purifoy Jr.

Using scripture to interpret scripture is essential to understanding the Bible. Most of the people and events in the first chapters of Genesis are referred back to by both Old and New Testament authors. Even more importantly, Jesus Himself spoke often about Genesis.

It is these divinely-inspired statements that provide the interpretive framework for recognizing the historicity of Genesis. Three things become apparent when looking at these passages:

  1. The Biblical authors saw the events and people of Genesis as real history.
  2. They understood those historical events had spiritual and theological consequences.
  3. They realized those consequences continue to have an impact on the present day.

Since it is helpful to read what was actually said, here are some of the more important statements about Genesis.

Moses & Isaiah

“For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all…

View original post 594 more words

The Failure of Darwinism

abandoned accident aeroplane aircraft

Photo by Lindeboom Jean-Bapt on Pexels.com

Roddy Bullock is a fantastic writer. Having just finished his book, “The Cave Painting” I went looking for his other writings. This is the only blog entry I could find. I hope more turn up in the future.

Darwinism’s much-touted and largely doubted mountain of evidence feeds a valley of death–the cold, purposeless, meaningless death of natural selection makes life in the valley heartily attractive to the strong, and hardly attractive to the weak.

 

The great failure of Darwinists is not only their failing to produce any evidence to support their theory in its strong form (all life from non-life in ever increasing information-bearing specified complexity), but in their obstinate refusal to admit and own up to the fact that their force-fed ideas (that few people believe) have predictable consequences (that no one likes).

 

Ideas have consequences. If Darwinism is correct, and we truly are the result of unguided, chance mutations that made us more successful at killing off weaker beings, then we must live with the difficult task of trying to formulate any reason why we all should not simply continue nature’s task. Unguided purposeless processes produced our mind, but what is to produce our morals? If science has defined our facts, can’t science define our values? So far Darwinists have not been able to come up with any coherent ethic consistent with both the inherent human ethos and their heartless killing machine. Look it up, no one can do it. And no one ever will.

 

#ConsistencyMatters!

The argument (evolutionism) that has set itself up against the knowledge of God is impotent.

…also, if anyone has links to Roddy Bullock’s blog entries, please let me know.

 

UPDATE: I found a 2nd article by Roddy Bullock! Enjoy!

Survey of the Book of Amos

The book of Amos is a reminder to humanity that worshiping the Creator is the purpose of creation. When mankind wants to worship themselves, God gives the gift of suffering (Amos 4) as a megaphone to re-calibrate one’s thinking.

The Domain for Truth

I imagine many Christians can increase their knowledge of the Minor Prophets.  Here’s a survey of the third book of the Minor Prophets: Amos.

Purpose: We will look at the authorship, purpose, structure and other aspects of the book of Amos so we would be more familiar with this part of the Bible and yearn to study it for ourselves.

View original post 1,443 more words