The Tulip Driven Life

Hello all, this is the first round of an online friendly debate between myself, Thomas Booher, a Calvinist Christian, and David Delmar, an agnostic. We do not know how many rounds we will go yet, but the only rule is that we cannot exceed 1500 words in our replies per round. The first round will be each of us presenting our opening statements, and all subsequent rounds will be responses to each other's opening statements. With that said, let us begin by introducing the debate topic, which I will be arguing for in the affirmative, and David in the negative which is: “God’s judgment and eternal damnation are consistent with His perfect benevolence toward and love of mankind.” Round 1 (Thomas Booher's opening statement): I confess the God of the Bible, as the one and only triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, three persons, one essence/being. His original creation is a perfect expression of His nature.  God is not expressing love and benevolence when He judges ...

By: Thomas F. Booher Some may believe that a pastor’s inability to defend the faith is an unimportant issue. After all, is not a minister preaching to believers who are already convinced of Christianity? Indeed, he is, and this is precisely why the pastor must have a firm grasp of biblical apologetics. It is the pastor’s job to help equip the saints so that they are always ready “to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear” (1 Peter 3:15). The pastor himself must be well-versed in defending the faith, and he must know how to do it in a biblical manner, so as to teach and model apologetics for the congregation. Defending the faith well comes with benefits for both minster and congregation alike.             Apologetics gives the minister greater confidence when he preaches the word because he knows that his faith is sure. Indeed, the great value and benefit of presupp...

FRAME AND BAHNSEN ON VAN TIL’S APOLOGETIC: A COMPARISON  By: Thomas F. Booher                John Frame and Greg Bahnsen are two of the most well-known advocates of Van Tillian presuppositional apologetics. Both studied under Van Til and are especially qualified to write on his apologetic method. What follows will be a brief examination of both Frame and Bahnsen’s analysis of Van Til’s apologetic. It will become evident that, on the whole, Bahnsen is in greater agreement with Van Til’s thought than Frame is, though both men would claim to accept the heart of Van Til’s methodology. Frame and Bahnsen will be discussed together, examining their interaction with Van Til’s teaching in several key areas, highlighting both their agreements and disagreements.              For Cornelius Van Til, an apologetic dialogue between believer and...

             GREENVILLE PRESBYTERIAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY THE COMMON GROUND BETWEEN BELIEVER AND UNBELIEVER Thomas Booher AP 21 Introduction to Apologetics December 5, 2014               In many Christian apologetic methodologies, much energy is spent in an effort to determine or establish common ground between the believer and the unbeliever. Some conclude that the common ground is historical evidences, while others argue it is man’s rational capabilities or the physical creation itself. [1] Still others say that there is no common ground or point of contact whatsoever, and only subjective impulses from the Holy Spirit can convince someone of the Christian faith. Cornelius Van Til would implement the transcendental argument, that is, he would attempt to show the skeptic that without a belief in God, one could not believe or know anything. The...