All posts by James

Wholly Other or Wholly Given Over? (Gavin Ortlund)

Articles, Gavin Ortlund, Theology

“Wholly Other or Wholly Given Over? What Van Til Missed In His Criticism of Barth” by Gavin Ortlund

In this essay I will examine Van Til’s criticism of Barth in three steps. First, I will describe Van Til’s criticism of Barth as it is articulated in his major anti-Barth writings. Secondly, I will critically evaluate Van Til’s criticism of Barth. My argument will be that Van Til’s critique rests upon a serious misinterpretation of Barth’s theology. Thirdly, I will attempt to explain Van Til’s criticism of Barth by examining some factors in Van Til’s historical context that make his reaction to Barth more intelligible. I will conclude by making some reflections on current evangelical assessment of Barth.

“Bavinck’s Bug” or “Van Tilian” Hypochrondria? (Laurence R. O’Donnell)

Articles, Epistemology, Laurence R. O'Donnell

“‘Bavinck’s Bug’ or ‘Van Tilian’ Hypochrondria?: An Analysis of Prof. Oliphint’s Assertion That Cognitive Realism and Reformed Theology Are Incompatible” by Laurence R. O’Donnell

The following is an analysis of two essays by Prof. K. Scott Oliphint wherein he levels criticisms against Herman Bavinck’s (1854-1921) formulation of realism as the cognitive foundation for non-theological knowledge (hereafter: philosophy). The form of the reply, a loosely-interpreted scholastic quaestio, reflects Bavinck’s own presentation of the topic.

Neither “Copernican” nor “Van Tilian” (Laurence R. O’Donnell)

Articles, General, Laurence R. O'Donnell

“Neither ‘Copernican’ nor ‘Van Tilian’: Re-Reading Cornelius Van Til’s Reformed Apologetics in light of Herman Bavinck’s Reformed Dogmatics“ by Laurence R. O’Donnell

As a Presbyterian it is a special pleasure to be with you here in the cradle of Presbyterianism in order to reflect upon the relationship between Herman Bavinck (1854–1921) and one of his American Presbyterian proteges―Cornelius Van Til (1895–1987). After providing a few introductory remarks on Van Til’s neo-Calvinist heritage, I will summarize his basic attitude toward Bavinck’s theology and provide a snapshot of how the English translations of Bavinck’s works have influenced the perception of Bavinck’s influence upon Van Til in recent scholarship. I will then adduce three lines of evidence which, when taken together, suggest that Bavinck’s theological influence upon Van Til is pervasive. Finally, I will conclude with a brief analysis of Van Til’s appropriations of Bavinck’s thought and some reflections on the future of Van Til studies.

The Problem with TAG (Alex Malpass)

Alex Malpass, Apologetics, Articles

“The Problem with TAG” by Alex Malpass

In this article, I will discuss the ‘transcendental argument for the existence of God’ (henceforth ‘TAG’). This forms the backbone of the ‘presuppositional’ approach to Christian apologetics, first formulated by Cornelius Van Til (1895 – 1987). At its simplest, it is a radical defense of the Christian position, which boldly tries to dismiss any counter-argument with the claim that the notion of argument itself presupposes the Christian position. If this were true, then the opponent of Christianity would have to assume the truth of the position they oppose when presenting any argument at all. Instead of the Christian being on the back-foot and trying to respond to the attacks of their opponent (say with archeological evidence or biblical contradictions, etc), TAG is an attempt to switch the weight of the attack back at the non-Christian (who has to justify their ability to present an argument of this nature in the first place). While this is an ingenious way of arguing, it is ultimately flawed, as I will show in this paper.

The Transcendental Perspective of Westminster’s Apologetic (Robert D. Knudsen)

Apologetics, Articles, Robert D. Knudsen

“The Transcendental Perspective of Westminster’s Apologetic” by Robert D. Knudsen

Westminster Theological Seminary has a full-scale department of apologetics. This makes it stand out among major theological seminaries. In most of the main line seminaries apologetics waned in proportion to the growth of liberal theology. In liberal seminaries, apologetics suffered because of theological liberalism’s understanding of the Christian faith, and it finally disappeared.

Theological liberalism focused on spiritual life, as it understood it. Especially in its Ritschlian form, it placed at the center an overwhelming spiritual experience of the, person of Jesus. For the faith of the church, it said, Jesus has the value of God. But both this faith and the Christ it confesses lie beyond the pale of doctrinal formulation. Of itself doctrine was regarded as rigid and dogmatic, an ossified expression of the dynamics of the spirit. Doctrine was given second place, as a symbolic expression of the life found in Jesus Christ. The tactic then was to penetrate beyond doctrinal formulations, with their particularity and rigidity, to the dynamics of the life of spirit. Within this climate of thought, apologetics, as a defense of a doctrinal formulation of Christian faith, was downgraded and finally eliminated. It was replaced by comparative religion, the philosophy of religion, the psychology of religion, and now even by the phenomenology of religion.

Presumptuous Presuppositions (Mark Horne)

General, Mark Horne, Reviews

“Presumptuous Presuppositions: The Apologetics of Cornelius Van Til” by Mark Horne

Whether one entirely agrees with him or not, no Christian interested in apologetics–the reasoned defense of the Faith–can afford to be uninterested in Cornelius Van Til, the late professor of Apologetics at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. According to John Frame, Van Til “is perhaps the most important thinker since Calvin.” Yet Frame demonstrates throughout his book that he is willing to be quite critical of his former professor. His praise is not due to an unquestioning allegiance, but to years of reflection as a theologian, philosopher, and apologist.

For the Sake of Argument (David P. Hoover)

Apologetics, Articles, David P. Hoover

“For the Sake of Argument: A Critique of the Logical Structure of Van Til’s Presuppositionalism” by David P. Hoover

In the essay that follows, one major school of apologetics — Presuppositionalism — is taken up by assessing its logical structure in the writings of its most well-known representative, Cornelius Van Til. The author’s conclusion with regard to Van Til’s presuppositionalism is that the Christian’s apologetic task has been greatly frustrated, in effect, by the replacement of that task with an obscure philosophy about reason-giving.

After identifying the virtual canonical status which the presuppositionalists accord their own position vis-a-vis the evidentialists’ position, the author goes on to test out the Van Tilian apologetic on its own terms. (i) Van Til insists that Christian theism be shown, in some sense, to be necessarily true, but lacks any argument which accomplishes this; (ii) Van Til’s own elucidation of the sort of necessity he is after makes the opposite point probability remains; (iii) the principles which Van Til advocates to get the argument under way logically preclude the only result Van Til will accept; and (iv) Van Til’s resort to “analogical reasoning in order to transcend what would otherwise be a hypothetical conclusion only serves to further obfuscate the presuppositionalist’s position. Analogicity cannot be, nor is it intended to be, a logical property of the argument structure employed by the presuppositionalist. Its function seems to the author to be metaphysical in character. But if so, the presuppositionalist’s argumentation is “saved” from the level of hypothesis only upon pain of conflating, and hence confusing, the categories of logic and metaphysics.

Derrida, Van Til and the Metaphysics of Postmodernism (Jacob Gabriel Hale)

Articles, Jacob Gabriel Hale, Philosophy

“Derrida, Van Til and the Metaphysics of Postmodernism” by Jacob Gabriel Hale

Perhaps the most prevalent philosophical movement in the west today is what has been termed “Postmodernism.” Since its rise to the center stage of philosophical discourse in the west over the past thirty years, many essays, books and critiques have been written in an effort to define and analyze postmodern thought. This task has proven to be very daunting. Because postmodernism is trans-disciplinary, and lacks a core “logos” that defines itself singularly, postmodern thought expresses itself in many different forms, given its broad base of intellectual interests. However, in spite of the inherent slipperiness of the term “postmodernism,” there have been successful efforts to locate core beliefs that seem to drive postmodernism in its various interests and some of postmodernism’s leading thinkers.

The Problem of Natural Revelation in the Thought of Cornelius Van Til (Andrew Fulford)

Andrew Fulford, Articles, Theology

“The Problem of Natural Revelation in the Thought of Cornelius Van Til” by Andrew Fulford

In recent days we have seen some spirited discussion on the place of natural law and natural theology in the life of the church. One figure who stands out as an important member of the discussion about such matters, at least in Presbyterian circles, is Cornelius Van Til, especially in his essay “Nature And Scripture.” In the course of that essay, Van Til discusses two kinds of “natural theology”: that of the Westminster Confession (which he takes to be identical with scripture’s), and the kind supposedly finding its origin in Greek philosophy. In the following, I will discuss his comments on the first kind, and more particularly, his scriptural argument for his position.

Modernity, “Radical Orthodoxy”, and Cornelius Van Til (Albert R. Haig)

Albert R. Haig, Articles, Theology

“Modernity, ‘Radical Orthodoxy’, and Cornelius Van Til: A Journey of Rediscovery of Participatory Theism” by Albert R. Haig

In this paper, the influence of modern thought on Evangelical Protestant theology is analysed. It is argued that a critical engagement with the theology of Cornelius Van Til represents an ideal starting point for this analysis. Van Til’s claim that all human knowledge must be analogical is defended. It is argued that rationalism is a specifically modern phenomenon, and that its root cause was the severance of the ontological bond between the Creator and His creation that occurred in the late medieval period. Rationalism is seen as inevitably ending in nihilism. Van Til is subject to criticism on the grounds that his metaphysics is inconsistent with his epistemology, and that he adopts the modern ontological Creator/creation split. In sympathy with the contemporary theological movement known as “radical orthodoxy”, it is argued here that a truly Christian theology must embrace the Platonic doctrine of participation. It is suggested that a revisitation of the Renaissance idea of a prisca theologia, thoroughly reformulated in the light of modern historical criticism, might be helpful to this end.