fbpx

Colbert’s Apologetic

In a recent interview with theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss, Stephen Colbert debated the existence of God, the nature of nothing, and the laws of quantum mechanics. Though he proceeds in his typical humorous fashion, he levies a simple, yet effective presuppositional argument.

One of the tenets of presuppositional methodology (à la Cornelius Van Til) is to stand on the opponent’s philosophical foundation for the sake of the argument. Colbert’s closing line is a prime example of doing just that—all the while demonstrating the untenable foundation upon which his opponent stands. In the end, something ≠ nothing.

Jonathan Brack

Share:

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on email
Email
On Key

Related Posts

Meeting R. C. Sproul

In 2006, I had been attending a non-denominational evangelical church largely influenced by John MacArthur and the Master’s Seminary. The church placed a heavy emphasis

Always Unbelievable: Radio Ruminations

In my recent radio discussion with a couple of “Natural Theology” apologetes, I was able to give some verbal snippets of how one who holds

It Is There and It Should Not Be Silent: Van Til’s Critique of Schaeffer

Daniel Schrock revisits Cornelius Van Til’s critique of Francis Schaeffer’s apologetic. Van Til has been criticized for his treatment of Schaeffer’s method, but Schrock reminds us that though it may be difficult to carry out polemics in a spirit of Christian love, we cannot assume it prohibits polemics.