presuppositionalism

Van Til Versus The Matrix

/ Apologetics, Culture, Philosophy, Technology / Leave a Comment

Westminster Seminary Press has kindly granted permission for me to post a preprint version of my essay, “Van Til Versus The Matrix: A Van Tilian Response to the Simulation Hypothesis,” originally published in The Future of Reformed Apologetics: Collected Essays on Applying Van Til’s Apologetic Method to a New Generation (2024). The essays are all based on lectures delivered at Westminster Theological Seminary during the 2023 Conference on Reformed Apologetics. Other participants included Brian Mattson, Dan Strange, Scott Oliphint, and Christopher Watkin.

It was a fun topic to tackle: I hope you enjoy reading the essay as much as I enjoyed writing it!

Understanding Christian Apologetics

/ Apologetics, Plugs / 1 Comment

Understanding Christian ApologeticsLast summer saw the publication of a new ‘counterpoints’ book on methods for defending the faith, Understanding Christian Apologetics (Tyndale/Hendrickson). I had the privilege of explaining and defending the presuppositional method, most famously associated with Cornelius Van Til. Here’s the full line-up of contributors:

Classical Apologetics – Melissa Cain Travis

Evidential Apologetics – Sean McDowell

Presuppositional Apologetics – James N. Anderson

Cultural Apologetics – D. A. Horton

Ecclesial Apologetics – Timothy Paul Jones (also volume editor)

Each main chapter defines and defends the author’s favored approach in 5,000 words, followed by 1,000-word responses from the other four contributors.

The book was originally planned to include case studies to illustrate each approach, but in the end the publisher decided to put these in a downloadable study guide.

In February, I had the great pleasure of joining Dr. Jones for a bookstore event at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, where we each gave a brief presentation on our contributions to the book, followed by an audience Q&A:

I’m also pleased to share that this year’s meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society will feature a panel discussion between the contributors (with Ben Shaw standing in for Sean McDowell, who is unable to attend). Hope to see some of you there!

Of Rocks and Trees: Mattson in Defense of Gaffin and Van Til

/ Philosophy, Theology / 1 Comment

Three decades ago, the Westminster Theological Journal published an article by Richard B. Gaffin, Jr., with the modest title, “Some Epistemological Reflections on 1 Cor 2:6–16.” Gaffin’s main purpose was to provide some direct exegetical argument to support “several key emphases” in the epistemology of Cornelius Van Til. (Read the first page of the article to get the fuller context.)

In my humble estimation, Gaffin’s article is a masterclass in theological exegesis. But it has recently been subjected to criticism by two Reformed writers, Joel Carini (here) and Keith Mathison (here). Both contend that Gaffin illegitimately imports into his exegesis a philosophical doctrine that also polluted Van Til’s thought: the idealist theory of “epistemological holism,” according to which only exhaustive knowledge can be true knowledge, due to the unity and interconnectedness of all truth.

I think the criticisms of Carini and Mathison miss the mark, and fortunately I don’t need to prove it myself, because Brian Mattson has written an eloquent defense of Gaffin and Van Til. I commend it to you.

Evaluating the Thought of Cornelius Van Til

/ Apologetics, Philosophy, Theology

A cordial conversation with Keith Mathison and Kevin DeYoung about the theology and apologetics of Cornelius Van Til, prompted by the publication of Keith’s book Toward a Reformed Apologetics:

 

Even with an hour and 20 minutes, we barely scratched the surface of the issues raised in Keith’s book, but I think it was a helpful exchange nonetheless, and I hope it can serve as a model for ongoing discussions between Van Til’s advocates and his critics. Kevin did a fine job as both moderator and mediator!

Go here for the podcast version.

Suggested Readings on Epistemology

/ Philosophy, Recommendations

I was recently asked to suggest reading lists on (1) epistemology in general, (2) religious epistemology, and (3) Reformed presuppositional/Van Tilian/Framean epistemology. Here’s my response, in case it’s useful for other folk. Obviously these are just start-up lists, and there may be better introductory texts/articles that I haven’t come across. (Registered users, feel free to make further recommendations in the comments.)

I think the following books should get you up to speed on contemporary epistemology in general (and religious epistemology more specifically):

  • Robert Audi, Epistemology: A Contemporary Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge (3rd ed.)
  • Ernest Sosa et al, eds., Epistemology: An Anthology (2nd ed.)
  • Matthias Steup et al, eds., Contemporary Debates in Epistemology (2nd ed.)
  • William Alston, Perceiving God
  • Alvin Plantinga, Warrant: The Current Debate, Warrant and Proper Function, and Warranted Christian Belief
  • Richard Swinburne, Epistemic Justification
  • John M. DePoe & Tyler McNabb, eds., Debating Christian Religious Epistemology

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has many helpful articles on topics in epistemology, but start with these:

Kelly James Clark’s article “Religious Epistemology” in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy provides a good overview of the contemporary landscape (along with a helpful bibliography).

On Reformed presuppositional/Van Tilian/Framean epistemology, I recommend the following for starters:

Van Til & the Use of Evidence

/ Apologetics

Van Til & the Use of EvidenceThom Notaro’s excellent little book, Van Til & the Use of Evidence, has been out of print for years. However, Thom holds the copyright and has generously granted permission for me to make a scanned copy of the book available for free download. Enjoy!

Van Til & the Use of Evidence (with cover) (3.5 MB)

Van Til & the Use of Evidence (without cover) (3.2 MB)

The advantage of the “without cover” version (other than the smaller size) is that the PDF page numbers correspond exactly to the book page numbers.

Both versions are searchable (big thanks to Fred Zaspel and Michael Riley).

Van Til and Analytic Philosophy

/ Apologetics, Philosophy

An essay written for a forthcoming collection of essays “in the Van Til tradition.”

The main thesis: While Van Til was rightly critical of the early forms of analytic philosophy (Moore, Russell, etc.), there is no inherent conflict between Van Tilian philosophy and contemporary analytic philosophy; in fact, there are significant points of affinity or complementarity. Thus, “analytic Van Tilianism” is not a contradiction in terms, but rather a project worth pursuing.

Reforming Apologetics (Wrap-Up)

/ Apologetics / 4 Comments

For completeness, here are all the entries in my series reviewing J. V. Fesko’s Reforming Apologetics:

If you’re pressed for time (and aren’t we all?) you can get the gist of things by reading the entries on “Introduction,” “The Light of Nature,” and “The Book of Nature and Apologetics.” If you’re especially interested in Dr. Fesko’s critiques of the Van Tilian emphasis on ‘worldview’ and Van Til’s advocacy of transcendental argumentation, along with my responses to those critiques, read the entries on chapter 5 and chapter 6.

Reforming ApologeticsMy overall assessment of the book can be summarized as follows: I think Dr. Fesko does a great job of defending the use of natural revelation (“the book of nature”) in apologetics and in showing how the mainstream Reformed tradition has consistently and enthusiastically affirmed such use (albeit with important qualifications related to the noetic effects of sin and the necessary interpretive role of special revelation). However, the major shortcomings of the book are its repeated misinterpretation and mischaracterization of Van Til’s position (and that of other presuppositionalists, such as John Frame and Scott Oliphint) and its failure to establish its thesis that Van Til’s views are significantly at odds with Calvin’s views or with confessional Reformed theology. In fact, given what Dr. Fesko affirms in chapter 8 about a “covenantal epistemology,” and his agreement with Calvin (and Van Til!) on the need to read “the book of nature” through the “corrective lenses of Scripture,” I believe he ought to be more hesitant about aligning himself with the Thomistic (“classical”) approach to natural theology and more sympathetic toward Van Til’s efforts to “reform apologetics” by bringing it more into line with a consistently Reformed epistemology and doctrine of revelation. In any event, it’s good that Reformed brethren are continuing to have these conversations. Let’s be thankful for the significant areas of common ground we affirm, while pursuing better understanding of one another and (by God’s grace) greater convergence over time.