0:00 2 Different Approaches To Apologetics: Natural Theology & Presuppositionalism
0:37 Pressuppositionalism Defined
2:03 Natural Theology Defined
3:36 Examination Of The Cosmological Argument From The Stand Point Of Natural Theology
5:18 So, How Do You Argue With An Atheist? …Answering The Question From The Stand Points Of Natural Theology & Presuppositionalism
5:46 5 Major Aspects Of Critique About Natural Theology …It’s Not Clear To Me What Will Count As A Proof For GOD’S Existence
5:58 Why It’s Not Clear To Me What Will Count As Proof For GOD’S Existence. e.g.
9:24 What’s Required In Logic As A Sound Proof?
11:30 When Most People Ask For A Proof Of GOD’S Existence They Don’t Know What They’re Asking For…They Don’t Want A Sound Argument; They Want A Convincing Argument
12:23 What’s A Convincing Argument? (A) An Agument Whose Form Is Valid (B) Premises Are Known To Be True By All Men (G) Each Premise Being Proven (D) Known Independently Of The Conclusion
15:08 Here’s Why The Task Is Ridiculous
16:12 e.g. What’s Wrong With This Conception Of A Convincing Proof, A-B-G-D (There Isn’t Universal Agreement On The Laws Of Logic. Even Where There Is Agreement, There’s Tremendous Disagreement As To Their Normative Status)
19:25 Bottom Line: The’re Arbitrary Assumptions In Natural Theology; Arbitrary Assumptions Need To Be Exposed For Their Arbitrariness
20:09 There’s No Agreement Among Philosophers About The Foundations Of Logic
21:02 (B) Premises Are Known To Be True By All Men… Ridiculous, Because Knowledge And Ingenuity Vary From Person To Person
21:56 An Implicit Prejudice Is Going To Come Into Play… e.g. Eastern & Western Understandings Of Logic
24:05 Conclusion Of Premise (B) Unrealistic And Is Not Satisfied By Any Proposition …We Have No Fixed Termination Point For A Convincing An Argument; We Rather Have A Person Relative Termination Point …e.g.
25:01 Reaching A Convincing Point In An Argument May Not Be A Virtue; Because, Convincing Is Relative To The One Who I’m Speaking …e.g.
25:59 Not reaching A Point Of Conviction…It Could Just Be A Reflection On The Person And Not The Argument
26:48 (G) Each Premise Being Proven…This Premise Is Problematic Also Because No One Can Construct An Infinite Theory Of Proof For Each Premise …e.g.
30:03 Convincing Argument Conclusion: Nobody Can Gain All Of The Knowledge By Convincing Arguments …Therefore, Some Things We Know Apart From Convincing Proofs …Which Of These Are Exempt From Convincing Argumentation?
30:44 (D) Known Independently Of The Conclusion …It May Just Be That The Conclusion That GOD Exists, Is Itself Necessary For Knowing The Other Propositions In The First Place…It IS The Foundational Proposition For All The Rest
31:33 RECAP
32:01 Theological Problems With Natural Theology …Is It The Living GOD Or An Idol Which Is Proved By Something That Is More Certain Than GOD, And Something Which Is Know Independently Of GOD?
33:23 Another Problem With Natural Theology Is, It Holds That Partial Elements About Theism Can Be Reached At The End Of An Autonomous Reasoning Process…Scripture Says It’s The Full Truth That’s Objectively Visible At The Start Of The Reasoning Process
34:26 Secondly, Natural Theologians Think The Unbeliever Can Be Fair, Opened Minded, And Can Make A Correct Use Of Reason… But What Does Scripture Say About The Unbeliever’s Mind And His Thinking?
37:19 RECAP
37:53 Two Special Methodological Errors Of Natural Theology—#1 Granting Autonomy To The Unbeliever In Their Thinking Process #2 Assumes The Unbeliever Needs The Truth Of GOD’S Existence
39:12 It’s For These Reasons That We Must Avoid The Use Of What Traditionally Are Called The Theistic Proofs, Because The Very Method Of The Proofs Concedes The Point Which We Want To Refute—The Autonomy Of The Sinner
40:09 The Autonomous Reasoning Which Forms The Foundation For The Historical Use Of The Theistic Proofs, Assumes That Man Is The Final And Ultimate Reference Point Of Reasoning & Learning And That Man’s Mind Is The Interpretive Arbiter Of The Truth
40:26 In Opposition To The Theistic Proofs, The Christian Affirms That GOD Alone Is The Final Reference Point For Intelligibility And Reasoning; GOD Alone Is The Final Interpreter Of Every Fact Because HE Is The Creator Of Every Fact
40:59 Van Til Quote #1
41:47 Van Til Quote #2
42:54 Romans 1…
43:51 On The Day Of Judgment No Man Will Say…
45:37 …Inward Fire WhichThey Can’t Possibly Quench—The Knowledge Of GOD
46:36 It’s Important That Our Outlook And Conceptions Be Formed By The Truth Of GOD’S Inscripturated Revelation; It Alone Can Properly Assess The Sickness Of Men e.g.
47:31 Scriptual References
48:13 The Unbeliever Is Surpressing/Masking The Truth…We Don’t Go And Say Well Let’s Play This Game That Your Mask Represents And See If That Will Get The Mask Off
49:13 Cosmological Argument Doesn’t Prove A Non-Natural Cause
51:50 R.C. Sproul & Presupp
59:26 Summary
1:02:06 Questions
It is important to stay focused on what is important while defending the faith. Learn what the goals of apologetics are and how to accomplish these essential objectives when arguing with both atheists and theists.
