Posted in Aquinas, Doctrine of God, History, Van Til, philosophy, tagged about, Frame, itinerary, Oliphint on July 19, 2008 | No Comments »
I’ll be in Florida all of next week, so I will probably not be posting anything.
However, I do have plans of things to discuss in the weeks following. As you can probably tell by the amount of information on Aquinas on this blog, I really like his stuff. Also, I think Aquinas’s philosophical theology is [...]
Posted in Anselm, Aquinas, Bible, History, Mind/Body, metaphor, philosophy, tagged epistemology, skepticism, aristotle, metaphysics, forms, realism, nominalism, John on July 10, 2008 | No Comments »
The whole realist/nominalist argument among the Medieval philosophers often seems arcane and pedantic to us post-moderns. I mean, who cares if the form is in the thing or somewhere else? The whole idea of a form in things is way too “spooky.” Reality is given to us; we don’t need forms right? Well, without answering [...]
Posted in Anselm, Bible, Doctrine of God, Van Til, philosophy, tagged apologetics, reason/revelation, evidence on June 28, 2008 | 1 Comment »
I don’t think it is autonomous rationalism to begin one’s apologetics with theological proofs. The whole point of beginning with reason is not to start from a neutral ground where all facts are brute facts and everyone agrees that religion is not an issue. The point of beginning with reason is to demonstrate the necessity [...]
Posted in History, Van Til, augustine, philosophy, tagged truth, antithesis, Medieval on May 28, 2008 | No Comments »
As I read it is becoming more clear to me that folks like Van Til, Schaeffer, and Bahnsen did not invent the idea that Modern Philosophy has borrowed turf from Christianity. Van Til was critical of Medieval Philosophy for being too rationalistic but Ettiene Gilson in his The Spirit of Mediaeval Philosophy argues that Modern [...]
Posted in Anselm, Christology, Soteriology, atonement, tagged aulen, Christus Victor on March 22, 2008 | No Comments »
*The following is the conclusion to a review I did of Gustaf Aulen’s Christus Victor. Therefore it is lacking a bit in context, but still important for anyone who is privy to the issues.*
Because Jesus was God and man one cannot argue that the Atonement involved a total God-to-man movement or a total man-to-God movement; one [...]
Posted in Anselm, philosophy, tagged apologetics, proofs, reason/revelation on March 21, 2008 | No Comments »
Many Reformed folks have been taught that the ontological proof for God’s existence is completely worthless for apologetics. This idea is usually backed up by the argument that Anselm was a rationalist who thought he could prove God just by thinking really hard. But, is that not a bit anachronistic? Was Anselm [...]
Posted in Anselm, Bible, Doctrine of God, tagged Anselm, election, Romans, will, Wright on March 13, 2008 | No Comments »
N.T. Wright gives, I think, an important hermeneutical tool for Romans 9. He says,
if there is complete disjunction between God’s justice and everybody else’s, it would be better not to use the term at all. (Commentary on Romans, p. 639).
Having previously held to the hermeneutic “God can do whatever he wants” I no longer [...]
Posted in Anselm, atonement, tagged Anselm, atonement, Christus Victor on March 1, 2008 | No Comments »
David Bentley Hart argues for continuity between the Patristic understanding of Christ’s atonement and that of Anselm.
Indeed, in Cur Deus Homo the matter of guilt is somewhat recursed: it is guilt that is set aside, made of no account by Christ’s grace, so that the power of death should be overcome without violence to [...]
 | Eric Parker on About |
 | Dr. Martin Erdmann on About |
| Eric Parker on Autonomy |
 | John Lofton, Recover… on St. Thomas in Protestant … |
 | Jacob Aitken on No Epistemology Without T… |
