Lily Ponds and Diving Boards| Cornelius Van Til and C.S. Lewis’s Transcendental Arguments

As most of my readers already know, when it comes to Cornelius Van Til I’m pretty much a sycophant. But, As an evangelical Christian apologist, I also have to read C.S. Lewis on the regular and quote him at least once in all of my papers and blog posts. These two guys are my dudes.... Continue Reading →

Advertisements

The Fact of All Facthood: God and a Philosophy of Fact

“But I would not talk endlessly about facts and more facts without ever challenging the nonbeliever’s philosophy of fact.” -Cornelius Van Til, The Defense of the Faith, 257. “The result of our historical enquires thus depends on the philosophical views which we have been holding before we even began to look at the evidence. This... Continue Reading →

“As Kant Could Have Shown…”

This is a short assignment I presented to my Analytic Theology class which is being taught by Dr. James Arcadi here at TEDS. In it, I interact with Andrew Chignell's proposed solution for the Analytic theologian to the problem of what "Kant has shown". Whether it’s round Immanuel Kant, or through him[1], most theologians and... Continue Reading →

A Clarkian and A Vantillian discuss TAG

I recently had a short dialogue with Doug Douma, author of The Presbyterian Philosopher: The Authorized Biography of Gordon H. Clark, concerning Van Til’s Transcendental Argument for God. Doug is a “Clarkian” and I am a “Vantillian” yet we were able to have a friendly disagreement. If you know anything about the Clark/Van Til controversy,... Continue Reading →

i Think, Therefore “I AM”: Van Til’s TAG

“According to the principle of Protestantism, man’s consciousness of self and of objects presupposes for their intelligibility the consciousness of God. In asserting this we are not thinking of psychological and temporal priority. We are thinking only of the question as to what is the final reference point in interpretation. The Protestant principle finds this... Continue Reading →

Making Sense of Reason

“It has been intimated that fallen man is both irrationalist and rationalist, and at the same time. His irrationalism rests upon his metaphysical assumption that reality is controlled by or is an expression of pure chance. His rationalism is based upon the assumption that reality is wholly determined by laws with which his thought is... Continue Reading →

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑