Category Archives: Articles

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

Andrew Fulford, Articles, Epistemology, 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.

How Much Intellectual Common Ground Is There Between a Christian and a Non-Christian? (Timothy Paul Jones)

Apologetics, Articles, Timothy Paul Jones

“How Much Intellectual Common Ground Is There Between a Christian and a Non-Christian? Common Notions and Common Ground in the Writings of Cornelius Van Til” by Timothy Paul Jones

The thinking of a Christian and a non-Christian diverges at the most basic level. The believer in Jesus Christ sees all of reality from the cognitive perspective of an individual who lives with “the mind of Christ” and whose life is shaped by the Word of God (1 Corinthians 2:16). This does not cause Christians to become more intelligent, more rational, or more perceptive than non-Christians. A commitment to Jesus Christ does, however, cause every fact in the universe to be seen in a different way, as a reality that exists in, for, and through Christ (Colossians 1:15-20). There is thus a fundamental epistemic distinction between the Christian and the non-Christian. In the words of Reformed theologian Cornelius Van Til, “The natural man has epistemologically nothing in common with the Christian.”

 

But what does this mean for meaningful engagement between Christians and non-Christians, particularly when it comes to ultimate issues such as the truth of Christianity? And what—if any—truths about God can an unbeliever know through nature or natural reason? Most importantly for those of us who live to fulfill the Great Commission—if there is a fundamental epistemic distinction between the thinking of a Christian and a non-Christian—on what basis can a Christian discuss the truth of Jesus with someone who rejects Jesus as he is described in Scripture?

Did Cornelius Van Til Really Teach that Non-Christians Know Nothing? (Timothy Paul Jones)

Apologetics, Articles, Timothy Paul Jones

“Did Cornelius Van Til Really Teach that Non-Christians Know Nothing?” by Timothy Paul Jones

I am not a Van Tilian presuppositionalist, though I am sympathetic with certain aspects of Cornelius Van Til’s approach. Over the past few years, I have—to the best of my knowledge—read every book and syllabus that Van Til wrote related to apologetics.

 

Even after reading several thousand pages of Cornelius Van Til’s writings, I do not find his approach or his assumptions to be wholly convincing. At the same time, I’ve also recognized that there are instances when Van Til’s critics have misconstrued his claims. Admittedly, the critics aren’t the only culprits here! Van Til himself was at least partly to blame. Much of Van Til’s articulation of his own thinking is scattered, unclear, and poorly supported. Still, despite Van Til’s apparent struggle to communicate with clarity, there is much to learn from this Reformed philosopher and theologian. As part of this process of learning, there are some criticisms of Van Til that should be set aside because they misrepresent what Van Til thought and taught.

Junius and Van Til on Natural Knowledge of God (Nathan D. Shannon)

Articles, Epistemology, Nathan D. Shannon, Theology

“Junius and Van Til on Natural Knowledge of God” by Nathan D. Shannon

This article compares the views of Franciscus Junius and Cornelius Van Til regarding pre- and post-fall natural knowledge of God. It is argued that while differences are clear, Junius and Van Til both claimed that pre-fall natural theology was not intended to function independently of special revelation. Junius and Van Til also agree that post-fall natural theology, unaided by special revelation, is not theology in any meaningful sense. The conclusion, borrowed from Willem Van Asselt, is that for both Junius and Van Til the determining factor with regard to the structure and status of natural theology is the God-human relationship. This thesis, so far as it is true, enhances the historical credentials of Van Til’s characteristically neo-Calvinist view of natural theology and natural reason.

Christianity and Evidentialism (Nathan D. Shannon)

Apologetics, Articles, Epistemology, Nathan D. Shannon

“Christianity and Evidentialism: Van Til and Locke on Facts and Evidence” by Nathan D. Shannon

Cornelius Van Til’s rejection of brute factuality and his claim that the purported neutrality of evidentialist rationality is in its essence decidedly anti-Christian set the presuppositional apologetic method apart from all others. In this article, I present a study of Van Til’s philosophies of fact and evidence in comparison with the evidentialism of John Locke, arguably the quintessential modern evidentialist. Section 1 is a brief survey of Locke’s epistemology, focusing on the nature of facts and their role in his theories of knowledge and belief. In section 2 we turn to Van Til. Van Til’s argument from predication leads us to the theological underpinnings of his views of fact and evidence. Then in section 3, having Locke’s and Van Til’s views before us, we turn to Van Til’s critique of evidentialism and, specifically, his claim that evidentialism is ultimately committed to creaturely rational autonomy. In this way Locke’s epistemology serves as a test case for the claims Van Til makes against brute factuality and evidentialist rationality.

Two Theological Accounts of Logic (Nathaniel Gray Sutanto)

Articles, Nathaniel Gray Sutanto, Philosophy, Theology

“Two Theological Accounts of Logic: Theistic Conceptual Realism and a Reformed Archetype-Ectype Model” by Nathaniel Gray Sutanto

In this essay I analyze two emerging theistic accounts of the laws of logic, one precipitated by theistic conceptual realism and the other from an archetype-ectype paradigm in Reformed Scholasticism. The former posits the laws of logic as uncreated and necessary divine thoughts, whereas the latter thinks of those laws as contingent, accommodated forms of a pre-existing archetypal rationality. After the analysis of the two accounts, I offer an explication of the theological rationale motivating the archetype-ectype model of the laws of logic, and apply that model to recent discussions on theological paradox, abstract objects, and the function of natural-theological argumentation in apologetics. Finally, I respond to three anticipated objections against the archetype-ectype model.

Covenantal Apologetics and Common-Sense Realism (Nathaniel Gray Sutanto)

Apologetics, Articles, Nathaniel Gray Sutanto

“Covenantal Apologetics and Common-Sense Realism: Recalibrating the Argument from Consciousness as a Test Case” by Nathaniel Gray Sutanto

Cornelius Van Til argued that theistic arguments are useful so long as one formulates them “in such a way as not to compromise the doctrines of Scripture.” He rejects, therefore, not the proofs in and of themselves but the foundation on which the proofs are often presented. Van Til thus argued that it is possible to construe the arguments in a manner consistent with Christian theistic principles, on the one hand, or anti-theistic principles, on the other. The former appeals to them in an indirect fashion as confirmatory of the necessary existence of the self-contained triune God while the latter comes in the form of a direct appeal, often yielding the meager result that some god probably exists. Thus many of Van Til’s intellectual descendants have attempted to show how particular theistic proofs might be appropriated into an apologetic dialogue in a manner consistent with the Reformed worldview. I offer, in this paper, then, a Reformed, Covenantal reappropriation of a contemporary popular argument for the existence of God: the argument from consciousness. What is attempted in this essay is thus not originality in substance but in application and expansion.

Some Epistemological Reflections on 1 Cor 2:6-16 (Richard B. Gaffin)

Articles, Epistemology, Richard B. Gaffin, Theology

“Some Epistemological Reflections on 1 Cor 2:6-16” by Richard B. Gaffin

In Jerusalem and Athens G. C. Berkouwer expressed disappointment over Van Til’s criticism of his views. He had expected that “exegesis of Holy Scripture would play a decisive role.” Instead, not only did Van Til misunderstand him, he believed, but “of far greater consequence” was “the total lack of biblical reflection and the absence of a reply to all the exegetical questions.” In a brief response Van Til conceded Berkouwer’s point. His critique of Berkouwer’s theology “should have had much more exegesis in it than it has. This is a defect.” He then went on to generalize, “The lack of detailed scriptural exegesis is a lack in all of my writings. I have no excuse for this.”

 

This interchange highlights a frequent perception (and charge): Van Til talks repeatedly about “the Christ of the Scriptures”; his uncompromising concern is to let “the self-attesting Christ of Scripture” speak. Yet his writings provide precious little, if any, argumentation based on a careful treatment of key biblical passages; his approach is assertive and dogmatizing, rather than exegetical.

The Resurrection of Thomism (Doug Erlandson)

Apologetics, Articles, Doug Erlandson

“The Resurrection of Thomism” by Doug Erlandson

At the heart of the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas lies his natural theology. The linchpin of that theology is his Five Ways–his arguments for the existence of God. The presupposition behind all this is the belief that God’s existence can be demonstrated on theologically neutral grounds. If God’s existence cannot be demonstrated, then neither can His attributes. It is no accident that Aquinas’ arguments for God’s existence precede his discussion of God’s attributes. Without the former, his demonstration of the latter would be impossible.

Many twentieth century evangelicals have been attracted to the natural theology of Aquinas, agreeing with him at least in their belief that God’s existence can be demonstrated on theologically neutral grounds. The list includes Stuart C. Hackett, Norman Geisler, R.C. Sproul, J.P. Moreland, and William Lane Craig. In light of the resurgence of the Thomistic arguments and their attractiveness for evangelicals, we must examine afresh its approach to the apologetic task.

Shall We Argue Transcendentally? (Greg Welty)

Apologetics, Articles, Greg Welty

“Shall We Argue Transcendentally? A Perspectival Debate on Apologetic Methodology” by Greg Welty

The purpose of this essay is to give the modern-day Reformed apologist some perspective on this thorny dispute about the appropriate legacy of Van Til for apologetic method. The following pages will seek to defend at length the flexibility in method that Frame has enthusiastically brought to the Van Tillian school of apologetics, showing how Frame applies the principles of common grace and depravity to apologetic method more consistently than Van Til himself. But that flexibility will be defended in a way that remains sympathetic to the core concerns of those who would wish to maintain transcendental argumentation as the exclusive way to honor Christ in the defense of the faith. It will be seen that, despite well-intentioned criticism to the contrary, Frame’s “presuppositionalism of the heart” is the best way to preserve Van Til’s distinctive theological legacy while avoiding Van Til’s mistaken inferences from that theology to the area of methodology.

 

The present thesis proceeds in two steps. First, Van Til’s best arguments for a transcendental approach will be neatly presented, correlated with Frame’s best criticisms against the necessity of that approach. Second, in the aftermath of this hopefully illuminating exchange, an attempt will be made to more precisely articulate the proper relationship between transcendental and traditional arguments in the repertoire of the Reformed apologist.