Presuppositional Conflict

Discussion in 'Apologetical Methods' started by Puritan Sailor, Feb 11, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JohnV

    JohnV Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    [quote:5e7409b3e5]It's much easier to readily assent to Van Til's motives and models when he's rightly
    understood. I'm glad to see we're in agreement with Van Til's methodology -- for I believe it is the only apologetic methodology warranted by scripture. [/quote:5e7409b3e5]
    I hope I didn't leave you with a false impression. I meant that I agreed with the presentation that Byron gave, and that these portions of the Van Til method do not fall outside my own. I cannot agree with you concerning the exclusivity of the Scriptural warrant for particularly Van Til's apologetic. I would think that that is self-evidently counterproductive. But there are a number of people who, like you, think this way. I'm still trying to figure that out.

    At the same time, as I have said, I have no disagreement with some of the basics of Van Til's method, as Byron expressed them. We may see different entailments, and that would not be unusual. Though we may not be united in methodology, I would hope that we are united in our mutual concern for presenting the truth of Scripture truthfully, in obedience to the mandate to reverence and gentleness in the doing of it. It is Scripture that is exclusive, not man's methodologies, so that our boastfulness is excluded.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page