Van Til/ Clark difference on apologetics

Not open for further replies.


Puritan Board Sophomore
First off I want to say that I do not want this to become a heated debate thread. I'm fairly new to the study of presuppositional apologetics and thus far have read Bahnsen's "Always Ready" as well as have listened to a few of his lectures and have read a few posts here regarding presuppositionalism.

With that said, I have two questions concerning both Van Til's and Clark's approach to presuppositional apologetics:

1) How/where do they both agree with one another?
2) How/where do they differ?

Sorry if this has already been asked before.


Puritanboard Clerk
CVT believes our knowledge is qualitatively different from God.
Clark believes our knowledge is quantitatively different from God.

The overly simple question, "Do we know an apple in the same way that God does?"

CVT said no.
Clark said yes.

That's the simple explanation of them.
Not open for further replies.