VirginiaHuguenot
Puritanboard Librarian
I am interested in hearing a concise summary of the differences (and commonalities) in the presuppositional apologetics of Gordon Clark and Cornelius Van Til.
I am not interested in creating a debate between Clarkians and Van Tillians, but I am interested in discussion between both sides about what these two men had in common and on what points they differed and how significant their differences were.
This discussion will be meaningful to me to the extent it can be understood in laymen's terms.
I am a Van Tillian (my presup is that he is right of course ), but what I have read thus far of the Clark-Van Til controversy has been way over my head. Simplicity for simple minds like mine, please!
I look forward to healthy discussion and further enlightenment about this interesting controversy.
I am not interested in creating a debate between Clarkians and Van Tillians, but I am interested in discussion between both sides about what these two men had in common and on what points they differed and how significant their differences were.
This discussion will be meaningful to me to the extent it can be understood in laymen's terms.
I am a Van Tillian (my presup is that he is right of course ), but what I have read thus far of the Clark-Van Til controversy has been way over my head. Simplicity for simple minds like mine, please!
I look forward to healthy discussion and further enlightenment about this interesting controversy.