Introduction The “Transcendental Argument for God” (TAG) is typically understood as resting upon the “Impossibility of the Contrary.” We may be in a better position apologetically if we think about the Impossibility of the Contrary (IoC) in terms of three aspects of the IoC. These three aspects of the IoC are definition, dogma, and demonstration. [...]

There is an objection to TAG (Transcendental Argument for God’s Existence) out there that goes something like this: TAG cannot save anyone. Depending on your context, sometimes it goes like this instead: Apologetics cannot save anyone. Of course, this is not much of an objection. It is more so just a slightly annoying comment. Perhaps [...]

“It is most unfortunate that in our day the biblical view of God is being sacrificed for a mirage of human freedom. Many Christians are denying certain characteristics that have always been attributed to God – such as his eternity, his unchangeableness, his infinitude, and his control over all things – because these characteristics are [...]

I’m still figuring that out! But here’s a draft of the model I used in the Vegas debates. Maybe you’ll find it useful.

I want to repeat a post made by Jeff Downs on the AOmin blog (here). Reformed Forum conducted another interview (here) of K. Scott Oliphint, and it is very, very helpful in understanding Van Til’s contributes to apologetics. Oliphint is probably the most qualified person alive today in summarizing Van Til’s thought. And in my [...]

Let’s say we are talking to a unbeliaver. To a real gentile pagan. Seems to me that the biblical model of evangelizing to him always starts with the general revelation. Like in acts 17 Paul starts by pointing out that he is talking about the Creator. He presupposes Creator God. Let’s say that this unbeliaver [...]