Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I do not know of any influence Tolkien would have had on the nature of the One Ring from Plato. However, seeing as that he was a Medievalist he was certainly influence by the Ring from The Nibelungenlied and Saga of the Völsungs.
Correct if I am wrong but C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, and others belonged to the Anglo-Catholic movement of their day.
His theology was incomplete or inadequate
And yet Machen was a better apologist (The Christian View of Man and Christianity & Liberalism) than Lewis was a "professional" theologian.
Lewis was never quite satisfying, beautiful writer or not, In my humble opinion.
As far as to what group apologetics is aimed, I disagree. The primary aim of apologetics is to prepare Christians to defend their faith against outsiders and not to persuade outsiders of the truth-worthiness of Scriptural claims.
Most of the Muslims I speak with are unfazed by apologetical arguments. But the moment you confront them with Christ crucified, his claims to deity, and his demands of us, you get an immediate response!
Finally, if Lewis is to the convert then would that not make his efforts toward the church and not toward the outside world.
The best approach is to the preach the Gospel. Repent and believe not "please believe my argument."
You are sadly mistaken. The Muslims scholars were thoroughly cognizant of Aristotle's works on among other things his Prior Analytics
No, I oppose the revelation of God in Holy Scripture to the endless multiplication of words from men.
"You also forget that part of the purpose of apologetics is to explain the Gospel in terms that a nonbeliever can understand---to explain why we do what we do and why we believe what we believe."
I'm of the opinion that the purpose of apologetics is to shut the mouth of the blasphmer.
Fallen man is desperately wicked. Only the word of God proclaimed can have an effect on him (condemnation or salvation via the Holy Spirit) . Most of the Muslims I speak with are unfazed by apologetical arguments. But the moment you confront them with Christ crucified, his claims to deity, and his demands of us, you get an immediate response!
Fallen man is desperately wicked. Only the word of God proclaimed can have an effect on him (condemnation or salvation via the Holy Spirit) . Most of the Muslims I speak with are unfazed by apologetical arguments. But the moment you confront them with Christ crucified, his claims to deity, and his demands of us, you get an immediate response!
I would apply the same to most of the atheists I know. I think apologetic arguments, as the name implies are necessarily defensive weapons suited to help protect and reassure sheep in the fold and to explain the blindness in men's hearts to truth that is plain as day to us as believers.
You are sadly mistaken. The Muslims scholars were thoroughly cognizant of Aristotle's works on among other things his Prior Analytics
Indeed, but after the time of Thomas, they rejected their own scholasticism.
No, I oppose the revelation of God in Holy Scripture to the endless multiplication of words from men.
I guess I need to go burn my Calvin then. Sorry, but this applies just as much to theology proper as it does to apologetics.
May I suggest that we move this over to the apologetical methods forum?
Calvin's work in his Institutes was a guide for those coming out of the Roman Catholic milieu.
Calvin's work in his Institutes was a guide for those coming out of the Roman Catholic milieu.
It's still words of men, so your critique of apologetics still applies to it.
I would say that you both seem to enjoy debate for its own sake, but you'd probably take issue with me.
I would say that you both seem to enjoy debate for its own sake, but you'd probably take issue with me.