It’s not a total dead ringer to the others, but as one who has read quite a few materials on presuppositional apologetics, the book didn’t give me anything new in terms of the methodology’s principles. Which, may I say, is not a bad thing at all. This similarity of expression among presuppositionalists is actually a sign of unity. And in terms of application, there are well-crafted simulations in the book that show how rubber meets the road even in philosophically complex conversations. Mind you, these simulations are not built upon strawman arguments (no apologist worth his salt should do that), but actual contentions from old and contemporary skeptics. What is taught by Dr. Oliphint is useful and workable whether you are new or already acquainted with presup. One may need to walk an extra mile due to some unfamiliar terms that he uses, but it’s worth it. Continue reading
Nothing new. All of us had to wrestle with this question because we’re not blind; we see suffering all around us, and now the Epicurean Dilemma is ringing in our heads. If God is really all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good, how could He let all these evils happen? Some ask this out of genuine concern and some ask this to make a case against the Christian God. How could He, we Continue reading
Most of the complaints I’ve heard from Arminians have been about the lack of graciousness that Calvinists exhibit when they are sharing the doctrines of grace. Ironic? Maybe; maybe not. While it is true that many who champion Calvinism (perhaps including myself) are apt to get carried away by the supposed strength of their argument and thus become insensitive, there is also an aspect of this doctrine that is, by default, offensive even to the 21st-century-Christian logic. Continue reading
Children are starving in Africa, therefore God is evil.
God can’t be evil, therefore He doesn’t exist.
Anyone who has been interacting with their skeptic friends will easily identify this as just the classic Epicurean Dilemma. But if there is an atheistic argument that amuses me and irks me the most at the same time, this might be it. Continue reading
“Love is defined by God, and not by Hallmark cards… Love that refuses to defend that which is loved is not biblical love at all… Love that shuns a fight is an oxymoron…” (p.114-115)
Given that this is only a “brief” defense of biblical satire, I’d say I’m satisfied. This will surely give the effeminate pietism of 21st century a run for their money.
Standing from a very pastoral point of view, it deals both with the targets and with the Christian satirists themselves. Not only does Wilson show how Scripture abounds with the use of satire, from the prophets, apostles and even Christ Himself, it also clears the smokescreen that people (including me) have regarding its use. A good ammunition of rebuke in a jungle full of egotistic wolves is more necessary than we think. Continue reading
“Dream bigger” is one of the many buzz words that define twentieth-century evangelicalism. Does God want us to “dream bigger”? Yes, He does. But what He means and what modern preachers mean are miles apart in terms of definition. Dreaming big for them means if you need a thousand pesos, God wants you to pray for a million. If you want a house, God wants you to “have faith” for a mansion. If you want a car, God wants you to believe Him for a Porsche or Ferrari. And the list goes on and on.
The existential cry of the Preacher in Ecclesiastes addresses this world’s gasping for meaning. At that moment when the creature decided to detach itself from its Creator, nothing makes sense anymore. “All is meaningless! All is vanity!” All the labor, all the merriment and weeping are done for no apparent reason. If they are not done for God, what are they for? But I heard there are geniuses who found a way around this. Nihilists, if I heard it right. Continue reading