Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaCalvinist  Quote:
Originally Posted by yeutter
Are Clark & Hoeksema really a different type of presuppositionalist?. They seem to me to be fideists that believed nothing could be known apart from special revelation.
| Presuppositionalism is not fideism. Fideism rejects philosophy/logic and just says "believe," even if what you are believing is irrational and makes no sense. The Clarkian system depends on making deductions based on the propositions contained in scripture. It also holds that the Christian worldview can be logically/philosophically defended. Of course it holds to the need for an axiom, but if that makes it "fideism" then Euclidean Geometry is also fideism. In fact, it would make everyone a fideist because the construction of any system depends on presuppositions. |
Are you a Clarkian, David?
Can you deduce the proposition: "presuppositionalism is not fideism" from Scripture?
If not, then youi don't really know that "presuppositionalism is not fideism," right?
Ironically, on the Vantillian pressuppositionalist, or some other apologetic methodology, can help the Clarkian out here. So, I'd agree with you that Clark's position isn't fideism. It's actually, as he says, dogmatism. The difference is, that I can defend the charge, you can't. Well, you can give your
opinion on the matter, but you don't
know that Clarkian presuppositinalism is not fideism.
Remember, David, Clarkians are consigned to silence. As Wittgenstein said, "Where one cannot speak, one should remain silent."
And while I'm at it, the 6 who voted that they were Clarkian, I'd like to know how they know that they are.
