Hey guys (and my mom, since she reads this now ;)),
In light of my recent discussion with Dave B on presuppostional apologetics (Van Til, Frame, Bahnsen, et. al.) and especially after listening to the poignant critique of Christian objectivity and certainity offered by Tony Jones, I’ve been reminded that to argue for a Christian Worldview has the pre-condition of systemized thinking. That is, we are not aruging for 1, 2, or even 3 points of orthodox Christian thinking, but for the Christian world and life view as a systemic whole. That is why Tony J is so effective in putting our little MacArthurite on the boards. He simply asks hard questions, gives answer which demonstrate the relative quality of his own subjective system, and continues to back our modern Mac-man into a corner. They are not bowing to the same epistemic authority, thus the continual pot-shots and talking over each others head. The question remains: how can we get these two on the same page?
Tony’s questions are good. He is a smart guy, no doubt. This assertion further necessitates our understanding as humble, reforming, Christian folks that what is in question here are not mere parts of interpretation but the overarching whole. That said, I offer you 3 links which may help. These are three debates I’ve listened to recently.
NOW, you’re busy, so don’t feel like you have to listen to all 3 en toto, rather, if you don’t have the time, listen to the opening statemetns only. This alone will provide you with a great window into the fact that defending the Chrstian worldivew as understood in the orthodox creeds and confessions requires a systematic approach.
FOR DAVE (and everyone):
Greg Bahnsen vs. Gordon Stein (this is an AMAZING debate, some tech languge, but so worth the 2 hours): http://graphe.wordpress.com/2006/12/21/bahnsen-vs-stein-tabash-smith/
Paul Manata vs. Dan Barker: http://www.rctr.org/ap5.htm
Paul Manata vs. Derek Sansone: http://audio.northcitychurch.com/Manata_Sansone_Debate.html
IN THE END, we must willingly be humbled by the enormous weight of our non or mis understanding. Our only hope for true certainty is by faith in God’s son through the spirit. As one of our students rightly pointed out last night, this is not different for the Unbeliver. All walk by faith, not by sight, in an ultimate sense. The question we must answer is whether or not the object of our faith can make sense out of what we see.