"I count myself one of the number of those who write as they learn and learn as they write.” -Augustine via John Calvin
Here's my research paper from Dr. Netland's Religious Epistemology course here at TEDS. My paper is a transcendental analysis of the necessary conditions of the possibility of the Inference to the Best Explanation. Inference to the Best Explanation is eminently important in our modern lives. We use it in our scientific investigations to decide between... Continue Reading →
As humans, we are intellectual, volitional, and emotional beings. We have a rational mind by which to think, we have a will or capacity for agency by which we act, and we have emotions which lead us to punch stuff or eat bad food when we’re upset. But as fallen and finite human beings, we... Continue Reading →
As most of my readers already know, when it comes to Cornelius Van Til I’m pretty much a sycophant. But, As an evangelical Christian apologist, I also have to read C.S. Lewis on the regular and quote him at least once in all of my papers and blog posts. These two guys are my dudes.... Continue Reading →
“But I would not talk endlessly about facts and more facts without ever challenging the nonbeliever’s philosophy of fact.” -Cornelius Van Til, The Defense of the Faith, 257. “The result of our historical enquires thus depends on the philosophical views which we have been holding before we even began to look at the evidence. This... Continue Reading →
“What huge imago made a psychopathic god” -W.H. Auden The phrase “repent of your sins” is a common expression today, especially amongst Evangelical Christians. But when asked, “what is a sin” the common Evangelical answer is “missing the mark”. And while we might throw in a factoid from Sunday’s sermon about the etymology of sin... Continue Reading →
This post was originally a paper I wrote for Dr. Kevin Vanhoozer's class ST 5201 God of The Gospel. We had a 2,000 word limit- so chill. I hope you to enjoy! Leave me your thoughts in a comment. What does it mean to be human? Countless hours have been spent by a legion of... Continue Reading →
Maverick is a Greater Swiss Mountain Dog and he’s an absolute brute. He is a really sweet boy and would never intentionally hurt anyone. However, watching him pulverize and scarf down a half chicken for lunch engenders a greater sense of reverence with each crunch. He’s not mean or aggressive in the slightest, he’s just... Continue Reading →
I recently had a short dialogue with Doug Douma, author of The Presbyterian Philosopher: The Authorized Biography of Gordon H. Clark, concerning Van Til’s Transcendental Argument for God. Doug is a “Clarkian” and I am a “Vantillian” yet we were able to have a friendly disagreement. If you know anything about the Clark/Van Til controversy,... Continue Reading →
“According to the principle of Protestantism, man’s consciousness of self and of objects presupposes for their intelligibility the consciousness of God. In asserting this we are not thinking of psychological and temporal priority. We are thinking only of the question as to what is the final reference point in interpretation. The Protestant principle finds this... Continue Reading →
“It has been intimated that fallen man is both irrationalist and rationalist, and at the same time. His irrationalism rests upon his metaphysical assumption that reality is controlled by or is an expression of pure chance. His rationalism is based upon the assumption that reality is wholly determined by laws with which his thought is... Continue Reading →
There’s an obvious connection between Logic and chess, this is evident from the numerous logic and debate books out there with pictures of chess boards on their covers. If you think of a chess player, you'll think of a very logical, analytic person. When you think of a Logic professor, it’s safe to assume he... Continue Reading →
“For man self-consciousness presupposes God-consciousness.” -Van Til, Defense of the Faith, pg. 113 There are a couple different facets to Van Til's Transcendental Argument for God, or “TAG”. Some people would even say that there are 3 perspectives on TAG- a normative perspective (the essence of TAG), a situational perspective (TAG applied in different ways... Continue Reading →
“Unless I believe in God, I can’t believe in thought: so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God.” -C.S. Lewis, The Case for Christianity, pg. 32 C.S. Lewis is one of the most popular Christian apologists of the 20th century, and arguably, one of the most read apologists of all time. His approach... Continue Reading →
The Euthyphro Dilemma is interesting enough on it’s own, but recently it became even more interesting for me when I stumbled upon somewhat of a debate between C.S. Lewis and Cornelius Van Til, two of my favorite Christian apologists. While I find a lot of similarity in the thought of these two (like their views... Continue Reading →
Moderator: Ok gents take your seats. I want to start by thanking you for coming to our round table discussion today. As you all know from your invites, we have a fun topic today: “Is the Christian faith rational?” Our structure will be fairly informal but I will be guiding our discussion. We’re going to... Continue Reading →
For the past couple of years I’ve been studying logic in order to sharpen my mind, appraise arguments, and help me develop arguments of my own. I’ve also been slowly marching through the works of C.S. Lewis. While these two topics were formerly unrelated, they both converged last year as I read Lewis’s book Miracles. ... Continue Reading →
Oh, Frosty the snowman Was alive as he could be And all the kids this season say that he can reason just the same as you and me. Abbie: "... no! I don't want to hear anymore of your sophistry! There is no creator, Frosty. And your insistence on jamming your silly beliefs down my... Continue Reading →
Parker's Pensées 