R.C. Sproul Vs. Greg Bahnsen Debate on Apologetic Methodology Part 1

[@gkolkman4]

I remember listening to this in 1996 ish on cassette tape. Thank you for posting

[@gfbc1689]

Thanks for listening

[@thevoiceofprophecytoday]

Great Job of Christian Growth. God bless 🙌 you for the upload

[@gfbc1689]

To God be the Glory

[@joshhigdon4951]

Awesome! Sproul is and may always be my favorite theologian of all time, but his apologetic methodology is weak when compared to Bahnsen. Sproul admired Aquinas to a fault. And it showed in his classical defense of God.

[@gfbc1689]

Semper Reformanda

[@joshhigdon4951]

​@@gfbc1689 semper reformanda brother!

[@blackpatriot3]

And the fact that presup is not logical and cannot be adjudicated is more of a critical thinking issue .

[@joshhigdon4951]

@blackpatriot3 I'd challenge you on that. As I learned the Scripture from my dad, so to shall I bestow the gift of knowledge to you.

[@5driedgrams]

I'm an atheist and I have a lot of fun watching these debates.

[@gfbc1689]

Check out this one: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jn_NZpaGf9WXZrcsi=OKGOClF_WD3og8mN

[@5driedgrams]

@@gfbc1689 I'll check. Thank you.

[@EleazarDuprees]

Evidence must be evaluated by presuppositions. To put the evidential approach over against presupp is to 1. misunderstand the distinction. 2. To put logic & science as independent of God (bad idea). 3. leaves with probability only, where presupp leaves apodictic certainty. 4. (etc...) Sproul should have learned presuppositional apologetics from Bahnsen and utilized it.

[@fndrr42]

Sproul is much more versed in the philosophy and simply recognizes the extremely obvious mistakes Bahnsen is making. It’s a flawed method and embraces post modern idealism

[@EleazarDuprees]

@@fndrr42 Bahnsen had a Ph.D in Philosophy and teaches a history of Western Philosophy and Logic courses. The fact is Bahnsen has a keener understanding on these disciplines than Sproul. Sproul thinks presupp commits the simple circular fallacy because he doesn't understand evaluating worldviews is circular by necessity.

[@fndrr42]

@@EleazarDuprees - he certainly does, he just thinks reality is not worldview dependent and to suggest it is requires an acceptance of subjectivism

[@EleazarDuprees]

@@fndrr42 By definition your worldview includes all your experience, all metaphysics and all possibility. Reality might simply be synonymous with worldview. So, we might be talking past each other at this point. The scriptures provide the explanation of how sense perception is possible (God puts wisdom in the inward parts, reveals himself through creation). Everyone uses sense perception and rationality but only Christianity can explain how. In short- the fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge.

[@fndrr42]

@@EleazarDuprees here is where the difference is. I argue there is an objective reality that is accessible and meaningful independent of preconceived notions or worldview lenses

[@dabish2888]

TOO. MANY. ADS!!! Half way through, we're already at 7 ads. Have your finger ready to kill the ads, or you'll double the length of this video.

[@joshhigdon4951]

You not think the content is worthy of revenue? Or the people who put it together for us to enjoy?

[@gfbc1689]

We will look into it

[@5Solas.2]

Buy KZbin premium or watch ads.

[@dabish2888]

@@5Solas.2 I have done that since my reply. Well worth the purchase. For some reason, the ads were insane on this video, as I recall.