Christian Theology and Apologetics

Archive for the category “Epistemology”

Logic and Scripture

GamalielLogic is simply the study of appraising arguments. When someone uses logic, he is trying to clarify reasoning and separate good arguments from bad ones. We use arguments every single day, though we may not realize this; with a little introspection anyone can begin to notice how day to day deliberation often follows the rules of logic. This is true today, and it was true for folks in ancient times as well, some of these arguments were captured in the pages of the New Testament. Read more…


Two Birds, One Stone, and Lots of Fallacies: A Response to Lawrence Krauss

The SCOTUS decision on same-sex marriage has been reignited recently by the story of Kentucky clerk Kim Davis and her subsequent incarceration and release from prison. Everyone has some commentary on this situation, even Cosmologist Lawrence Krauss. This paper is a response to Krauss’ article titled “All Scientists Should be Militant Atheists”  published at The New Yorker. Read more…

God, Time, and Middle Knowledge









Psalm 90.2 (NASB95)

Before the mountains were born

Or You gave birth to the earth and the world,

Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God.


If God exists necessarily, it is impossible that he does not exist. He cannot come into being. Thus, God exists permanently. The question then remains as to what manner could he exist permanently? There are two possible answers. He could exist omnitemporally throughout infinite time or God could exist timelessly. In the latter case God would transcend time and have no temporal whereabouts. Read more…

How Can a Loving God Allow Such Evil?


the-problem-of-evilIn popular culture it is often asked, “if there is a God, why is there so much evil in the world?” Thus, many see the existence of evil as somehow incompatible with the existence of an omnibenevolent being (God). C. S. Lewis properly identified the problem of evil as the problem of pain.[1] Read more…

Jesus, the Reasonable, Reason for the Season

Christmas is almost upon us this year and no other holiday during the year is the spiritual battle more apparent. Courts are ejecting nativity scenes from their lawns due to the pressure of an ever-escalating Post-Christian America. It is at this time of year that “Freethinker” groups attack anything and everything Christmas. They posit that God does not exist and attempt to convince others of their version of “truth” as well. Many unsophisticated Christians have fallen for their tactics, which are amateurish at best. Read more…

Hawkings Philosophical Bankruptcy

Stephen Hawking recently made the claim that he has three arguments that disprove the existence of God. I saw his arguments on the ChristianPost blog; they can be found at the following: http://blogs.christianpost.com/confident-christian/stephen-hawkings-three-arguments-against-god-23109/
In this article the author points out three arguments Hawking gives, they are as follows: Read more…

Is “There is No Objectivity” an Objective Statement?

Shannon Byrd

This is by far the most absurd article I have ever laid my eyes upon. He questions the categories such as “believer” and “atheist” and states they are useless. He then asserts that a new category is needed. wouldn’t this new category be just as useless since people lack the objectivity? He seems to question truth by stating, “Who is the objective observer to define these terms?” He seems to be alluding to there being no such thing as objective truth, which is false.

This authors logic is easily refuted:
For instance, is the statement “1. There is no such thing as truth” true? If not, then no need to be concerned On the other hand if (1) is true, then it also follows that (1) is not true, since there is no truth, according to (1). So if (1) is false, it’s false; and if (1) is true, it’s false. So either way (1) is false. The author’s position is self refuting.

Also, the author again, contradicts his own philosophy by stating that, “For instance they take Bible stories we read at face value, and yet I see a flicker in their eyes that tells me that they already know the stories are not true in the same way boiling water is true and can be tested—it’s hot!” Now this statement is very telling, for the author does not think historical studies in the Old or New Testaments can be verifiably correct.

Also, he contradicts his earlier presuppositions regarding objective observation. That is to say, who is the objective observer watching the boiling water? He states, “it’s hot” according to his philosophy he cannot make that observation. So my question is, what is the objective truth to his article? Who objectively observes that his words are true of what he wishes to convey? For instance, I can say I think his article is about “mashed up turtle spit” as my pastor has said before and there is nothing this author can say to refute my statement according to his philosophy.





Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: