0:00 GLB Reiterates The Argumentative Power The Laws Of Logic & Rationality Have Against The Unbeliever’s Worldview—It Cannot Account For Them
1:42 Van Til’s Take On The Futility Of Unbelief…Answering The Fool…Lay Down The Challenge Of 1Cor1:20
2:33 GLB Reiterates From Part 1, The 5 Problems For The Unbeliever: 1) THE PROBLEM OF INDUCTION; 2) THE PROBLEM OF UNIVERSALS; 3) THE PROBLEM OF BRAIN/MIND; 4) ETHICAL ABSOLUTES; 5) THE LAWS OF LOGIC…Additionally, The Problems Cannot Be Answered In Isolation But Must Be Unified…
3:29 But There Are Other Problems For The Unbeliever…eg, A Basis For INDUCTION By Appealing To DETERMINISM…Ends Up With Contradiction Between Freedom Of Man (INDETERMINISM) & The Reliability Of Scientific Method (DETERMINISM)
5:21 GLB Stresses That There Will Always Be Tension Within Unbelieving Systems Of Thought; &, He Provides Two Ways To Detect This Tension.
5:32 #1) On The One Side, Every System Of Thought Will Have Some Kind Of Order, Unity & Control Factors So That There’s Continuity, Universality, Or Standards In This World
6:01 #2) Every System Of Thought Has To Incorporate: Freedom, Diversity, Change, Individuality (eg, Barns)
6:29 Summary: The Unbeliever Has The Monumental Task Of Not Only Resolving The Aforementioned 5 Problems, But He/She Must Develop A Worldview Where Unity & Diversity Of The World Are Brought Together—THE PROBLEM OF THE ONE & THE MANY…The Unbeliever Cannot Resolve These Issues…GLB Expands…
8:22 DO NON-ATHEISTS HAVE A VIABLE WORLDVIEW? (Answer: No, They Don’t) What Puts CHRISTIANITY IN A LEAGUE OF ITS OWN (GLB VID) Is That The Christian Is Claiming, Since GOD PERSONALLY Revealed It, When You Reject It, You Can’t Make Sense Of Anything Else…OTHER RELIGIONS CANNOT MAKE GOOD ON THAT KIND OF CLAIM
10:00 GLB Expands Regarding Other Religions Being Incapable To Make Good On The Aforementioned Claim Of Christianity…eg, Hare Krishna—A Form Of Hinduism…There’s No PERSONAL REVELATION From GOD…The Bhagavad Gita Doesn’t Claim To Be Divinely Inspired As Does THE BIBLE
11:02 An Internal Critique Of Hare Krishna
12:40 You Can Do An Internal Critique Of Non-Christian Religions As Well. Ask, What Right Do They Have To Claim Divine Revelation; And, Is What They’re Saying Internally Consistent?…IT’S A MATTER OF WORLDVIEWS. SOME WORLDVIEWS NAME THE NAME OF god Or a god, & SOME WORLDVIEWS DON’T, BUT THEY’RE ALL WORLDVIEWS NONETHELESS
13:23 eg, Buddhism & The Matter Of Immanent Moralism (The Core Of Religion Is Living A Particular Kind Of Life)…SUBJECTIVE, NO BASIS FOR AUTHORITY
14:58 THE THREE THINGS TO LOOK FOR WHEN ARGUING WITH THE UNBELIEVER TO SHOW THE FUTILITY OF HIS/HER POSITION:
15:10 1) Look For Internal INCONSISTENCIES & CONTRADICTIONS
15:24 2) Look For ARBITRARINESS
15:57 3) Look For & Exploit The Inability Of Their Worldview To Provide THE PRECONDITIONS OF INTELLIGIBILITY…GLB Expands With Some Examples
16:28 GLB Explains How To Use These Apologetical Tools
17:35 THE SUBJECT OF SELF-DECEPTION (Rom Ch1)…Apologetics Is A Matter Of Life & Death
20:26 (Q)uestions & (A)nswers (?) Approx Of The Question 20:35 (Q) How Would You Deal With A Christian Cult? (A) Theological Polemics…GLB Expands Upon A Situation Where The Bible Isn’t The Christian Cult’s Authoritative Foundation 22:33 (Q) What About Islam?…A Personal god With A Different Revelation (A) Internal Critique…GLB Expands 25:09 (Q) ?What If Your Opponent Doesn’t Want To Be Rational? (A) Have Them Admit This…They’re Then Forced To Remain Silent
27:20 (Q) ?*How To Deal With Potential Interpretations Of The Word Rationality In An Argument? (A) The Christian Is Referring The Word (Rationality/Being Rational) Ultimately To THE MIND OF GOD; The Unbeliever Isn’t. In Addition, When That Is Revealed, Exploit The Unbeliever Having No Basis To Use This Word, Because He/She Cannot Account For Reasoning Without GOD
28:28 (Q) How Do You Deal With Someone Who Uses A Presuppositional Approach Without Christianity? (A) It’s Impossible To Make Sense Out Of Reality Apart From The Christian Perspective…With An Internal Critique, The Argument Disintegrates
29:06 (Q) What If Someone’s Worldview Was Exactly Like Christianity Except The Names Were Different? (A) It Would Be Christianity Just With Different Names
30:00 The Evaluation Of E.J. Carnell’s Understanding Of Presuppositions
32:17 (Q) Why Is It Wrong To Take The Approach That We Verify Our Hypothesis/Supposition Of Christianity? (A) It’s Wrong Because No One Reasons That Way…(No Neutral Standard Of Reasoning) Everyone Reasons Within A Worldview…GLB Expands On Carnell’s Problems
33:12 Van Til Quote…And The Misguided “Give JESUS A Chance” Bumper Sticker
33:48 (Q) How Would We Deal With Judaism? (A) Exegetical Polemics
37:32 (Q) How Would GLB Respond To Those Who Say Our Task As Christians Is To Win Souls, Not To Win Arguments? (A) Agree With Them, But Add, GOD IS INSULTED WHEN WE THINK SOULS ARE WON WHEN WE LOSE ARGUMENTS
In apologetics Christians are too often “on the defensive.” Dr. Bahnsen shows that believers need to take the offensive (without being offensive) against those who object to the truth of Christianity. He explains that this involves understanding their underlying worldviews and showing their intellectual futility while realizing that all unbelievers are secret believers who deceive themselves about their knowledge of God.
- Challenge to Unbelief (1 of 6) – Worldviews in Collision
- Challenge to Unbelief (2 of 6) – The Certainty of Christianity
- Challenge to Unbelief (3 of 6) – The Futility of Unbelief, Part 1
- Challenge to Unbelief (4 of 6) – The Futility of Unbelief, Part 2
- Challenge to Unbelief (5 of 6) – Self Deception (Romans 1)
- Challenge to Unbelief (6 of 6) – Apologetics Conference Q & A
