Greg Bahnsen Did Not Argue Presuppositionally

Greg Bahnsen is considered by many to be the master of presuppositional argumentation. His writings and debates are thought to be the epitome of how to argue that "the proof God exists is that without God it is impossible to prove anything." But is this true? Did Bahnsen really argue presuppositionally? This article questions this claim, and instead suggests that Bahnsen failed to truly argue transcendentally. Even though this is so? Bahnsen himself did provide us the tools we need to correct this going forward.

Epistemological Argument For God

Traditional natural theology sets as it's goal to prove that God's existence is more likely than the alternative. But this leaves the opposite position as a rational possibility. In this essay I take a different approach and present an argument for the certainty of God's existence based on the characteristics of epistemology. I attempt to put teeth the the claim of presuppositionalism that "The proof God exists is that without God you can't prove anything."

Moral Foundations

Examines the moral theory of Alan Gewirth, as presented in his book Reason and Morality, to see whether this perspective is consistent with the Biblical law of love.

Intellectual Probation

Examines the reality of epistemological ambiguity regarding God's existence and ultimate explanations, and suggests a theodicy for why this perplexing situation might be the case, without counting against God's existence.

Moral Argument For Faith

Often people try to argue we should be believers because of the intellectual evidence. But what if the evidence is not sufficiently clear? Are there other reasons to act on the assumptions of faith, besides intellectual reasons. We examine a moral argument for being a believer.


End of content

No more pages to load