Posts: 5336
Threads: 198
Joined: June 24, 2010
Reputation:
77
RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
August 25, 2011 at 8:58 pm
(August 25, 2011 at 5:39 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Oh man, I think DeistPaladin and I could have this discussion until judgement day, but the posts are just getting too long and cumbersome. Is there anything in particular you would like a response to DeistPaladin? If not, then I am ok with letting you have the last word. 
Actually, I concur that we've hashed this out as much as we can. I'm starting to repeat myself a little too much so it may be time to agree to disagree.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
Posts: 795
Threads: 27
Joined: July 1, 2009
Reputation:
27
RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
August 27, 2011 at 6:02 am
(August 18, 2011 at 8:40 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Statler's our only posterboy for this, by the way (that I'm aware of, though Frodo has made some remarks that would qualify; have to ask him for clarity).
As a matter of fact, Statler is not your only poster boy for this.
(August 18, 2011 at 7:20 pm)Rhythm Wrote: [Presuppositional apologetics is] the ultimate fingers-in-the-ears defense.
Hrmm, cramming your fingers in your ears is about refusing to hear your opponent's argument. That is exactly the opposite of what presuppositional apologetics does. You could not have missed the mark any worse if you had tried. But hey, it is delightfully fun rhetoric, I will give you that (although I would be embarrassed for anyone who found such rhetoric intellectually compelling).
(August 18, 2011 at 7:20 pm)Rhythm Wrote: The WMD of disagreements.
You do not win a debate by disagreeing. You have to break the argument. Presuppositional apologetics invests nothing in disagreements, and everything in breaking God-denying arguments. (Disagreeing is an autobiographical matter and therefore irrelevant.)
(August 22, 2011 at 9:01 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Is God's character the way it is because it is good, or is God's character good simply because it is God's character?
The latter; i.e., the nature and character of God is what defines good.
(August 18, 2011 at 8:38 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: And they seriously believe that Atheists are going to buy into this...
Quite the opposite, rather. They seriously believe that atheists will NOT buy into this, an expectation that arises from the Reformed theology upon which it is based.
(August 18, 2011 at 8:38 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: At any rate, here's an article by Jonathan Sarfati which "explains" this ideology, and RationalWiki's rebuttal calling him out on his bullshit.
Sarfati? Oh please. The man is a joke. If you want to reference someone who "explains this ideology," cite from the men indicated in the thread title, Cornelius Van Til or Gordon H. Clark. However, while I have exegetical disputes with the presuppositionalism of Clark, I would highly recommend the fourth edition of Van Til's Defense of the Faith edited by K. Scott Oliphint (P&R Publishing, 2008) and Greg Bahnsen's Presuppositional Apologetics: Stated and Defended (American Vision, 2009).
Neither Creation Ministries International nor Answers in Genesis should be consulted on presuppositional apologetics. It is not their area. Sarfati and his ilk (e.g., Carl Wieland) embarrass themselves even on that which is their area, young-earth creationism, never mind this in-depth subject.
Man is a rational animal who always loses his temper when
called upon to act in accordance with the dictates of reason.
(Oscar Wilde)
Posts: 67043
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
August 27, 2011 at 7:53 am
(This post was last modified: August 27, 2011 at 7:57 am by The Grand Nudger.)
Welcome back the forums. TAG is a joke, but everyone loves a song and dance. I expected more from you.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 12586
Threads: 397
Joined: September 17, 2010
Reputation:
96
RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
August 27, 2011 at 7:55 am
There goes the neighborhood... 
I'm sorry I missed the rest of the argument between you boys, but the imitrex ran me over like a mac truck.
Posts: 67043
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
August 27, 2011 at 7:58 am
Hehehe, morning summer. LOL, I figured that's what went down.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 12586
Threads: 397
Joined: September 17, 2010
Reputation:
96
RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
August 27, 2011 at 8:01 am
Now that I'm subscribed to the thread, carry on. Imma get up and make some eggs 'n grits 'n buttermilk biscuits in the meantime, though. Anybody who's hungry can teleport over.
Posts: 67043
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
August 27, 2011 at 8:09 am
(This post was last modified: August 27, 2011 at 9:03 am by The Grand Nudger.)
Ryft, do you feel that you have a refined version of TAG that avoids the fallacies of equivocation, division, false dichotomy, and special pleading? If so, drop it in the forums here, and we'll have some fun with it. Speaking more specifically to presuppositionalism, do you feel that there can be any grounds for debate when the demand is made at the outset that one assume that your position is completely correct before debate can begin? Does accepting a false presupposition invalidate logic entirely? Couldn't I leverage presuppositionalism to successfully prove any false statement true? Wouldn't any presupposition that makes the fewest assumptions have a broader application to the pursuit of knowledge in general? If we were to compare presuppositions, and the conclusions that follow, would it be unreasonable to then ask ourselves which of these conclusions seems to match observed reality to a more accurate degree?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 67043
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
August 27, 2011 at 9:13 am
(This post was last modified: August 27, 2011 at 9:13 am by The Grand Nudger.)
(August 27, 2011 at 6:02 am)Ryft Wrote: The latter; i.e., the nature and character of God is what defines good.
So then good is arbitrary? Whatever happened to be gods nature would have been good? Fair enough.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 5336
Threads: 198
Joined: June 24, 2010
Reputation:
77
RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
August 27, 2011 at 10:45 am
(August 27, 2011 at 8:09 am)Rhythm Wrote: Ryft, do you feel that you have a refined version of TAG that avoids the fallacies of equivocation, division, false dichotomy, and special pleading?
Don't forget begging the question, which TAG manages to do not once but twice in its three steps.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
Posts: 67043
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
August 27, 2011 at 10:49 am
(This post was last modified: August 27, 2011 at 10:49 am by The Grand Nudger.)
I wasn't aware that TAG had three steps, I thought it was entirely
"God exists"
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
|
![[Image: Untitled2_zpswaosccbr.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i1140.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fn569%2Fthesummerqueen%2FUntitled2_zpswaosccbr.png)
