{"id":54713,"date":"2021-02-05T13:09:28","date_gmt":"2021-02-05T17:09:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?p=54713"},"modified":"2021-02-05T13:09:28","modified_gmt":"2021-02-05T17:09:28","slug":"christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html","title":{"rendered":"Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>

\"\"<\/p>\n

Christian apologetics is neither dishonest, a \u201cstacked deck\u201d, nor an \u201cevidence-free\u201d methodology, simply because the apologist assumes the truthfulness of Christian beliefs before he or she starts. The fact is that both philosophy and science (as well as mathematics) start from axioms or unproven premises and move on from there.<\/p>\n

Modern science (especially since Darwin) commences with unproven or incompletely proven hypotheses and then seeks to\u00a0disprove<\/i>\u00a0them (philosopher of science Karl Popper is notable for having stressed this idea of falsifiability).<\/p>\n

As an example, today the big rage and cutting-edge of cosmology is dark matter and dark energy. I have recently written about these<\/a>, in an analogical argument regarding God being a spirit (that is, a non-material entity just as scientists now tell us 68% of the universe is). Very little is known about either at this point, yet they are the hypotheses at present that scientists are seeking to bolster with observation and hard evidence.<\/p>\n

So it is a methodology not completely unlike apologetics: a prior proposition is accepted, at least provisionally, without sufficient evidence to make it absolutely certain. Scientists then test it and see if it withstands the actual evidence. I do much the same thing as an apologist tackling proposed atheist \u201ccontradictions\u201d in the Bible. I start with the faith assumption that the Bible is inspired and internally harmonious.<\/p>\n

Atheists say that is poppycock and then provide me with 1001 \u201ccontradictions\u201d that I get to spend entire days grappling with (which I actually\u00a0enjoy<\/i>: at least in particularly patient moods). This would be similar to the notorious \u201canomalies\u201d in scientific hypotheses and theories that scientists grapple with. If I can defeat each of these contradictions with a plausible counter-reaction, then this backs up \u2014 or more accurately, establishes logical consistency with \u2014 my original Christian hypothesis.<\/p>\n

I don\u2019t think that\u2019s any more questionable or intellectually dishonesty than scientists attempting to falsify hypotheses, to see if they can withstand scrutiny. They start out with a certain point of view just as I do.<\/p>\n

I\u2019m not saying it is an exact analogy (few are), but it is enough of one to establish my point and defend myself and my methodology as a Christian apologist. Everyone holds unproven axioms or premises that they regard (whether provisionally or by stronger opinions) as unquestionable. And they proceed accordingly.<\/p>\n

There are many such laws regarded in this way in science; for example, the three laws of thermodynamics or biological evolution. Anyone who questions either gets the fifth degree as an anti-scientific troglodyte. They function (in practical effect) as scientific dogmas, just as we Christians have our root premises held in faith, but not contrary to reason (the Bible is inspired); therefore these alleged \u201ccontradictions\u201d should have counter-arguments which can defeat them.<\/p>\n

I start with the premise that the Bible is internally consistent. I don\u2019t have \u201cproof\u201d of that from reason, of such a nature that it convinces one and all of its truthfulness. But what happens as an apologist is that once I refute literally hundreds and hundreds of these claims (in effect, testing or examining my hypothesis), then I am more confident \u2014 in reason \u2014 that my faith premise is indeed true, because it has withstood all that onslaught.<\/p>\n

Atheists do the same thing. They start with a premise that the Bible is uninspired and is simply a collection of fables, old wives\u2019 tales, legends, etc., of ancient ignorant and primitive people who have little to teach us sophisticated moderns. Then they read these old dusty atheist collections of biblical contradictions and get confirmed in their original suspicions and gut instincts.<\/p>\n

Then the reactions (or lack thereof) of Christians further confirm them, because almost all Christians are woefully uneducated in apologetics and cannot defend their views rationally. So the atheist sees that and concludes: see! Christians are ignorant, anti-intellectual and anti-science. Glad I ain\u2019t one of \u2019em and have been liberated . . .\u201d<\/p>\n

What I do as an apologist is aggressively tackle these objections, interact with them and their defenders (as the case may be), present both sides on my blog in a dialogue format, and let readers decide who presented a better, more believable case.<\/p>\n

Apart from what I have observed about methodology, I think that is far more honest and open than atheists gathering together in forums, simply cheerleading each other and rarely interacting with serious opposing Christian arguments.<\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n

Photo credit:<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0geralt\u00a0<\/a>(1-27-21)<\/span> [Pixabay<\/a> \/\u00a0Pixabay License<\/a>]<\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Christian apologetics is neither dishonest, a \u201cstacked deck\u201d, nor an \u201cevidence-free\u201d methodology, simply because the apologist assumes the truthfulness of Christian beliefs before he or she starts. The fact is that both philosophy and science (as well as mathematics) start from axioms or unproven premises and move on from there. Modern science (especially since Darwin) […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":54724,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[2347,12988,12991,258,329,12985,94,13000,2538,93,2540,3634,439,2539,1706,12994,13003,12997,345,8293],"class_list":["post-54713","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-catholic-apologetics","tag-apologetics","tag-apologetics-epistemology","tag-apologetics-methodology","tag-atheism","tag-christian-apologetics","tag-christian-apologetics-science","tag-debate","tag-deductive-reasoning","tag-defense-of-christianity","tag-dialogue","tag-discussion-ethics","tag-evangelism","tag-falsifiability","tag-internet-discourse","tag-internet-ethics","tag-scientific-hypotheses","tag-scientific-methodology","tag-scientific-theory","tag-secularism","tag-theology"],"yoast_head":"\nChristian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Christian apologetics is neither dishonest, a "stacked deck", nor an "evidence-free" methodology, simply because the apologist assumes the truthfulness of In science a prior proposition (hypothesis) is accepted, at least provisionally, minus absolute certainty. Scientists then test it. Christian apologetics method is similar in many ways.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Christian apologetics is neither dishonest, a "stacked deck", nor an "evidence-free" methodology, simply because the apologist assumes the truthfulness of In science a prior proposition (hypothesis) is accepted, at least provisionally, minus absolute certainty. Scientists then test it. Christian apologetics method is similar in many ways.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-02-05T17:09:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2021\/02\/GlobeMan.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"640\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"427\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html\",\"name\":\"Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-02-05T17:09:28+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-02-05T17:09:28+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"Christian apologetics is neither dishonest, a \\\"stacked deck\\\", nor an \\\"evidence-free\\\" methodology, simply because the apologist assumes the truthfulness of In science a prior proposition (hypothesis) is accepted, at least provisionally, minus absolute certainty. Scientists then test it. Christian apologetics method is similar in many ways.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/\",\"name\":\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\",\"description\":\"Catholic biblical apologetics\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\",\"name\":\"Dave Armstrong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dave Armstrong\"},\"description\":\"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \\\"This Rock\\\" (now called \\\"Catholic Answers Magazine\\\"), \\\"Envoy Magazine\\\" (Patrick Madrid), \\\"The Catholic Answer,\\\" \\\"The Coming Home Journal,\\\" \\\"Gilbert Magazine\\\" (American Chesterton Society), and \\\"The Latin Mass.\\\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \\\"The Michigan Catholic\\\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \\\"Catholic Answers Live\\\" (twice), \\\"Faith and Family Live\\\" (Steve Wood), \\\"Kresta in the Afternoon,\\\" \\\"Son Rise Morning Show,\\\" \\\"Catholic Connection\\\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \\\"The Catholics Next Door.\\\" His large and popular website, \\\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\\\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \\\"index\\\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \\\"Surprised by Truth\\\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \\\"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\\\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \\\"The Catholic Verses\\\" (2004), \\\"The One-Minute Apologist\\\" (2007), \\\"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\\\" (2009), \\\"The Quotable Newman\\\" (editor: 2012), and \\\"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\\\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \\\"The New Catholic Answer Bible\\\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \\\"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\\\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \\\"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\\\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \\\"Quotable Wesley\\\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science","description":"Christian apologetics is neither dishonest, a \"stacked deck\", nor an \"evidence-free\" methodology, simply because the apologist assumes the truthfulness of In science a prior proposition (hypothesis) is accepted, at least provisionally, minus absolute certainty. Scientists then test it. Christian apologetics method is similar in many ways.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science","og_description":"Christian apologetics is neither dishonest, a \"stacked deck\", nor an \"evidence-free\" methodology, simply because the apologist assumes the truthfulness of In science a prior proposition (hypothesis) is accepted, at least provisionally, minus absolute certainty. Scientists then test it. Christian apologetics method is similar in many ways.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","article_published_time":"2021-02-05T17:09:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":640,"height":427,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2021\/02\/GlobeMan.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html","name":"Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-02-05T17:09:28+00:00","dateModified":"2021-02-05T17:09:28+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"Christian apologetics is neither dishonest, a \"stacked deck\", nor an \"evidence-free\" methodology, simply because the apologist assumes the truthfulness of In science a prior proposition (hypothesis) is accepted, at least provisionally, minus absolute certainty. Scientists then test it. Christian apologetics method is similar in many ways.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2021\/02\/christian-apologetics-methodology-similarities-with-science.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/","name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","description":"Catholic biblical apologetics","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e","name":"Dave Armstrong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dave Armstrong"},"description":"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \"This Rock\" (now called \"Catholic Answers Magazine\"), \"Envoy Magazine\" (Patrick Madrid), \"The Catholic Answer,\" \"The Coming Home Journal,\" \"Gilbert Magazine\" (American Chesterton Society), and \"The Latin Mass.\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \"The Michigan Catholic\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \"Envoy Magazine.\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \"Catholic Answers Live\" (twice), \"Faith and Family Live\" (Steve Wood), \"Kresta in the Afternoon,\" \"Son Rise Morning Show,\" \"Catholic Connection\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \"The Catholics Next Door.\" His large and popular website, \"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \"Envoy Magazine.\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \"index\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \"Surprised by Truth\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \"The Catholic Verses\" (2004), \"The One-Minute Apologist\" (2007), \"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\" (2009), \"The Quotable Newman\" (editor: 2012), and \"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \"The New Catholic Answer Bible\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \"Quotable Wesley\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).","sameAs":["https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics"],"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54713","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2331"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=54713"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54713\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/54724"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=54713"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=54713"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=54713"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}