Not being a student of post modernist philosophy, am I correct in inferring that “modern” apologetics is, at least to a degree, a response to the worldview espoused by such as Fritjof Capra, in The Tao of Physics, i.e. a sort of Heisenbergian view that we create our own reality by our interactions with, uh, reality? I’ve always wondered what would occur if simultaneous observations of two states of an electron were possible. Perhaps they’d cancel each other out, and we’d observe nothing?

Acknowledging the need for brevity in your paper, notably absent is the task of establishing not just the nature of truth, but that the Bible is the unerring truth. Perhaps this isn’t part of a “basic strategy”, but it seems quite basic to me.

Presumably a later paper will address this?

Did you get a good grade?

Thanks for reading the post and for asking excellent questions. They are so excellent, in fact, that I’m going to use them as the basis for my next substantive post, coming to a blog near you in the next couple of days.

To answer the most important question first: I haven’t got the paper back yet. I dunno what I got on it.

-Philip K. Dick

Ran across that yesterday — seems apropos.

Some day, maybe I’ll regale you, and the rest of blogland, with the “Losing My Religion” essay which has been in my head for about 3 years or so.

I think that quote occurred in one of the books on the reading list. It was probably Truth Decay.

Regale us with that, sir! It is something I would like to read.