Puritan Board Graduate
Here we should notice that Frances Schaeffer's apologetic method was based on this, and that Van Til attacked him for this. Schaeffer said that man's rebellion always brought it him into conflict with reality, so that man had to become inconsistent in order to get on with life. This inconsitency gave a point of contact for evangelism. Further, since Van Til denied this, Schaeffer said that Van Til was like Barth at this point. (The reconstructionist also denied it, following Van Til. I remember arguing with Jordan about this.)
Not to rabbit trail the thread even more, but from your perspective what did Van Til consider to be the point of contact? I thought he would argue for the same inconsistency.