For instance:
(1) please exegetically prove that the Noahic covenant actually is the formal delineation of the common and redemptive kingdom. (I have read both DVD and Kline on this, and surprisingly, this is merely assumed, and never actually proven.)
(2) If you are saying that we are not to use the Bible in terms of ethical discussions because the non-believer does not submit to the Bible, how does this not logically preclude us from using the Bible for evangelism purposes? Are we not allowed to convict people of their sin in order to lead them to Jesus Christ? How can this conviction of sin be done without using the Bible?
(3) Please explain using R2K arguments (ie: without the Bible) to an atheist with an evolutionary worldview how the institution of marriage is in fact something that is natural.
(4) When you say that love, marriage, diligence, morality etc... are not distinctively Christian, how is this consistent with presuppositional epistemology/apologetics, when presupp apologetics outright says that all of these things cannot be accounted for unless the Christian worldview is presupposed? Does that not make those things "distinctively" Christian?
That one ought to be interesting!
ReplyDeleteI'd like to see DVD revert to an unbelieving worldview to defend the Christian one.
Sorta like sacrificing free market principles to "save the free market." Silly.