Body
“What caused Van Til to reject classic natural theology? More importantly, was Van Til correct to pit classic natural theology against a supposedly Reformed version of it?” - Credo
- About
- Forum
- Account
Brief Review of a Paper on Presuppositionalism
Body
“These two claims do not match what I understand of Van Til’s apologetic. (I was schooled in this approach and adopted it for myself some years ago, so I am somewhat of an ‘insider.’)” - Matt Postiff
Van Til's Limiting Concept
Body
“A ‘limiting concept’ for Van Til is one that needs another if it is to be properly understood. It implies a complementarity. For example, one part of the Bible will not be properly understood without the other parts.” - Ref21
Should ‘Presuppositional’ Apologetics Be Rebranded as ‘Covenant’ Apologetics?
In 2013 K. Scott Oliphint of Westminster Seminary, Philadelphia published a book which he has called Covenantal Apologetics. I reviewed the book here and recommend it. But I expressed reservations about the writer’s agenda of rebranding Van Til’s apologetic teaching in line with the book’s title. Coming as it does from one of the foremost representatives of Van Til’s presuppositional approach, the thesis deserves attention. As I said in my review, by “Covenantal” Oliphint means the “covenants” of covenant theology.
Epistemological Foundations for a Biblical Theology, Part 3
(The series so far.)
Four Pillars
Some years ago I published a paper, entitled “Presuppositional Dispensationalism,”1 in which I attempted to summarize the biblical epistemological model with the illustration of four pillars.
