Ken Schenck: “In my opinion, the extent to which some Reformed presuppositionalists go makes their conclusions incredulous to all but those few who are already convinced of their viewpoint. Most crucially, they do not allow their presuppositions to be revised in the light of particular data. If the atomism of the Enlightenment makes it difficult to find overarching truth, the presuppositionalism of this sort hangs in air without any apparent basis whatsoever. Their system is thus unconvincing to any but the “elect,” a cipher for those who stumble upon their tribe by birth or happenstance.”
John Pieret: “If the ad populum understanding of religion is the measure that should be applied to its “truthiness,” then why shouldn’t the ad populum understanding of science be the measure of its “truthiness”?…In fact, Coyne wants to shoot only at the easy targets … which should hardly give us confidence in his aim.”
Jeanette Winterson: “So while I can see that Pullman wants us to remember that any religious text is both a palimpsest and revisionary, his own revisionism fails to win me over, not because I am a believer but because the Bible stories are better.”
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In