tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post452667441025594926..comments2024-03-27T20:28:38.015-04:00Comments on Reasonable Christian: B. B. Warfield on Inspiration: An Inherent Flaw of His PositionCharlie J. Rayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-9933860071889994412013-03-19T17:13:25.339-04:002013-03-19T17:13:25.339-04:00All "evidence" is tautological and circu...All "evidence" is tautological and circular. How I know you're telling the truth? I have no way to know if you're married or not. :)<br /><br />The point is that empirical proofs prove nothing since the senses can be deceived. A color blind person cannot see red or green.Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-37700953405759929832013-03-19T16:23:34.773-04:002013-03-19T16:23:34.773-04:00Besides, I don't agree with you. Scripture de...Besides, I don't agree with you. Scripture declares that man is without excuse, that the testimonies of the Lord are written in the book of Nature, that the guilt of Adam is written on his heart and is evident in his body. Does it mean that there's enough in Nature to lead a man to Christ assuming he is predestined for it? I've never seen it happen, and Scripture also says there Hudsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05511526445868840330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-58258191477005328482013-03-19T16:12:42.845-04:002013-03-19T16:12:42.845-04:00The evidentialist on the other hand is not trying ...The evidentialist on the other hand is not trying to "prove" anything. He's just providing evidence to support a thesis. I cannot prove to you that I'm married, but I have both documentary and natural evidence that satisfies me. The evidence is so good that it is tantamount to 'proof'. The best part is that it is not circular. The methodology subscribes to the same Hudsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05511526445868840330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-54745629468853927362013-03-19T15:32:48.675-04:002013-03-19T15:32:48.675-04:00The true presuppositionalist does not prove the tr...The true presuppositionalist does not prove the trustworthiness of Scripture or anything the Bible says, including inspiration and inerrancy. The self-evident truth (axiom) is that "Scripture is the Word of God." We would know nothing about Jesus being the incarnate Logos of God unless Scripture had revealed it to us.Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-4576752221283185102013-03-19T12:36:58.059-04:002013-03-19T12:36:58.059-04:00Warfield does not presuppose "that empirical ...Warfield does not presuppose "that empirical evidences can prove the Bible's authenticity". Like Article 2 of the Belgic Confession, he is simply saying that if the Bible is true then the empirical evidence, with respect to God's decrees on earth, exists and can be known by investigation like any other theorem of science, and it can be falsified. That is NOT the same thing as Hudsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05511526445868840330noreply@blogger.com