The Presuppositional Defense of the Reliability of the Bible

Discussion in 'Apologetical Methods' started by natewood3, Mar 2, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. natewood3

    natewood3 Puritan Board Freshman

    Draught Horse,

    I am in my second semester at Southern...

    I didn't really mean that I expect to learn anything like Bahnsen, because God hasn't gifted me with his kind of intelligence, but even most of my seminary professors are pretty intelligent for the most part and are knowledgable about most things. I just find it hard to see myself that knowledgable in 10 years; I suppose it is possible with many hours of study and reading...

    I will probably email you sometime soon...maybe within the next few days actually. I am sure you could tell me stuff I need to know and understand. BTW, I ordered Always Ready, and it will probably be here in a couple weeks...so I am sure I will have questions once I begin to read it.
     
  2. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    To add insult to injury. When he was teaching at RTS he required his students to do the amount of reading that Southern Cal required of him in philosophy: He said that graduate level students should be able to read 2 pages per minute (and he had in mine Kant, Hegel, etc). His students said that wasn't possible, so he relented to a page a minute.

    Just for giggles, time yourself next time you read hard-core theology.
     
  3. natewood3

    natewood3 Puritan Board Freshman

    Draught Horse,

    It is obvious that God gifted Bahnsen with an intelligence level far beyond most. He reminds me of people like Edwards or Spurgeon, who accomplished more in their lifetime than we could ever imagine accomplishing. It is ridiculous the level of study that was normal for those men, including Bahnsen. I suppose it takes that kind of diligence and perseverance to become anything close to what they were...
     
  4. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    My claims to fame is that I once read 100 pages of ridderbos in an hour, with decent comprehension.

    [Edited on 3--7-06 by Draught Horse]
     
  5. Me Died Blue

    Me Died Blue Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    I want your secret! ;)
     
  6. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Driven by fear and a desire to get it over with (it was the last chapter and a half, or so, in the book). That, and I had a test on it the next day.
     
  7. natewood3

    natewood3 Puritan Board Freshman

    Here is another question that came to mind...

    When we argue for the reliability of the OT and NT, how we use evidence in a way that does not make the Scriptures inferior? How we use evidence presuppositionally and non-autonomously?

    It is obvious from that the OT and NT manuscripts are in fact reliable, but the rub is how do we use that evidence in such a way that we are not testing Scripture's reliability by some outside standard?

    [Edited on 3-8-2006 by natewood3]
     
  8. Ron

    Ron Puritan Board Freshman

    You'll remember that in Bahnsen's debate with Stein, GB noted that there are all sorts of evidences for God's existence but that evidence will always be interpreted according to one's pre-commitments. Accordingly, although we can give these "indicators," outside the Christian worldview they will not be accepted; so rather than look at the "facts," which cannot be "brute facts," we must deal with the philosophy of fact.

    Ron
     
  9. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    another slogan that is helpful:
    Brute facts are mute facts
     
  10. Ron

    Ron Puritan Board Freshman

    ....we want to make sure that we don't communicate that man simply needs more evidence, for such would imply that man does not already know that which he rejects (and make God out to be a liar). Secondly, we don't want to communicate that we come to "know" by inference as opposed to revelation. Within that framework, one may properly show the rationality of Christianity, but always in the light that rationality presupposes the Christian worldview......ron
     
  11. Civbert

    Civbert Puritan Board Junior

    Except for your last clause, I agree. I think in a sense, we become aware of the things we already know through inference. Much of what we know, we are not aware of. The knolwedge is there in our minds, but we do not always access that information. Sometimes reason is be used to draw that knowledge forward. It can also be used to seperate knowledge from opinion.

    It's not unlike the way you will forget someone's name. You know the name, but you can not recall it.
     
  12. natewood3

    natewood3 Puritan Board Freshman

    Ron,

    I have already began to find that people interpret the "facts" according to their worldview. Most will presuppose God does not exist when arguing that God does not exist. Their worldview would not allow for God to exist, just as it would not allow for the resurrection, etc.

    I think I am starting to understand more of presuppositionalism and what it teaches. I am at least beginning to discuss it without having to ask question after question. You and Jacob have been a big help, although it is by the grace of God that we know anything.:bigsmile:
     
  13. Ron

    Ron Puritan Board Freshman

    Excellent! Hard work and lots of prayer.

    Ron
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page