Evidences and Presuppositional Apologetics
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 вер 2024
- Is it appropriate to use apologetic evidences with a presuppositional or covenantal approach to defending the Christian faith? Absolutely! Camden Bucey explains how all facts exist within God's world and if understood rightly can be used effectively in apologetic encounters.
Presup seems to hinge on the issue of the necessary preconditions for the laws of logic. If so, two questions:
1. Why assume there are precondtions?
2. If your god is the necessary precondition, what is HIS precondition? If you say "he doesn't need one", am I allowed to say "neither do the laws of logic"?
We each believe in a thing with no preconditions, but at least mine is evident...
this is why natural theology trumps the presup of van til who bought into Kantian idealism
1. Because if logic is not what God had determined/created it to be, you have to ask yourself what the alternatives would be in that kind of reality. It would be demonstrably either arbitrary or inconsistent. The other point to note is that God is not merely the necessary precondition for logic, but ALL of reality (ethics, science, etc.). The presup does not let Logic be the ultimate authority, but rather God.
2. Van Til addresses this and his opinion is in line with Reformed thought as far as I'm aware. There is no precondition for God. God depends on nothing. If He did, He would no longer be God. That's why presup apologists start with God and end with God. God is by definition the source of all knowledge, truth, and life. Van Til describes this in his description of the Ontological Trinity. You can also find this in the doctrine of the Aseity of God. You are of course most certainly allowed to say that logic has no preconditions, just as anyone else can say that anything else has no preconditions, such as the Scientific Method, morality, etc. This is what a presupposition is - something that does not require any proof for someone. It's just that if you do, know that it can and has been dismantled many times over (see Bahnsen vs Stein debate). On your last point you are EXACTLY correct, which is what every presuppositionalist labors to demonstrate to everyone - EVERYONE has their own presuppositions. Recognizing this is key.
@@Greg-n Van Til heavily criticizes Kantian thought in his book, Christian Apologetics. Admittedly, his use of transcendental thinking and argumentation is very much in line with Kant's teaching. However, Van Til maintains that Kant's whole outlook on rationalism is no different than the irrationalist. Natural Theology is refuted by Romans 1, which ironically is where most people go to as a proof text for Natural Theology. How? Because Natural Theology completely overlooks the noetic effects of sin. Natural Theology teaches that man reasons upward from creation to a knowledge of God. However, because the curse of sin has marred all of creation - including human - reason, it then becomes possible that humans will reason wrongly and cannot get to a knowledge of God. Romans 1:20 is crystal clear: all men are "without excuse". Romans 1 does not teach Natural Theology. It teaches natural revelation, which is something completely different.
@@godhenry007 "Because if logic is not what God had determined/created it to be, you have to ask yourself what the alternatives would be in that kind of reality. It would be demonstrably either arbitrary or inconsistent."
"Demonstrably"?
Demonstrate it, then; don't just speculate (or invite me to speculate).
"There is no precondition for God. God depends on nothing."
Nobody has yet shown that the laws of logic depend on anything.
@@JMUDoc What alternative possibility are you proposing for the origins of logic? Knowing this can help. I maintain that man's ability to reason is found in our constitution by being image bearers of the living God (Gen 1). Christ Himself is the source of all wisdom and knowledge from whom all things (including human reasoning) are made (Col 1 & 2). Man's ability to reason is only possible because of God to begin with.
I've heard someone propose that logic is merely a human convention (man-made), but I don't want to automatically assume that's what you had in mind. If you share a little of your idea on this it would help.
I'm learning about presup. Do you know of one verse that stands out that says that Yahweh, the God of Christianity, is the foundation of logic. Not just bound by logic, but is the foundation of it.
Where can I find your teachings on contraception, abortion, and sexual immorality?
A lot of talk of 'evidences', but still no proof of your gods existence!
You want the leap of logic so bad.
You're the first presuppositional apologist who hasn't pissed me off yet. Probably because in this video you're just explaining yourself rather than strawmanning us. I disagree with all of it of course but this was actually interesting.
I like your comment :D I'm a presupper
@@nigelnyoni8265 I am too a presupper. I'm also a Theocratic Libertarian and a postmillenialist
Good point and awesome explanation !!!!!
best explana so far
Hi, i'm from Brazil.
And I`m from Washington State!
Incoherent babbling.
Helpful
Why is god's interpretation of the world significant? Why does his opinion matter to me? It's only his subjective explanation about the meaning of the world. An opinion with which I wholeheartedly disagree. *My* interpretation of the world fits the reality that I experience much better than his does. Especially when you base his interpretation on biblical scripture. His horrific behavior, as expressed in the Bible, explicitly demonstrates his immoral, unethical, and unjust nature. Even if I believed he was real, I would *never* worship such an obnoxious and contemptible being.
Okay
Well said!
And you had to tell us all about it about something you wouldn't even change your mind?
I see you follow a lot of atheist channels that try to disprove the existence of God. The next time a theist says he won't stop believing in God, think about yourself and don't be a hypocrite.
Now go write such monologues to your edgy atheist company.
The reason why God's interpretation of the world is significant is because he is the absolute. His interpretation is not merely an opinion but the reality of things. Truth (as well as goodness, beauty, etc.) doesn't exist apart from him but rather in him. His character and attributes define such terms, being their standard. The reason why this is found in him and not in anything else is because he is infinite, eternal, and unchanging. Therefore, unlike every created thing (i.e. everything outside of God), he alone, in his very being, has the necessary preconditions upon which to anchor all else. How do we know this and upon what authority do I base it? Upon his self-attesting, self--revelation inscripturated in the inspired writings of the Old and New Testaments. In summary, he is the creator and we are his creatures, we rely upon him for all things including true knowledge and right interpretation, because of our rebellion against him our faculties are corrupted yet by his grace we are held back from complete insanity. In Christ alone may we be reconciled to him and restored to his image.
As for your statement concerning your opinion of his behaviour as the reason you would never worship him, why do you hold him to your subjective, fallible standards for right and wrong? There was a time when you were not and he brought you into being. He sets the standards. We are his creation, he may do with us as he wishes. If you don't like him, the problem is with you not with him.