# The True Enemy?



## greenbaggins (Oct 17, 2021)

I confess to getting a bit tired of the Van Til bashing that seems to be gaining traction on the PB recently. Christianity is under full attack now, just about everywhere in the world. While the world is attacking us either socially, physically, emotionally, right now I believe we need all the support and encouragement we can get from each other. The very last thing we need to do right now is promote the exclusion of one apologetics camp from the others. I have learned much from the classical apologists, even if I don't always agree with them. I would hope the classical apologists on this board could learn something from the Van Tillians. From recent activity on the board, it seems to me that some people appear to be viewing Van Til as more of an enemy than a friend to Christianity. Who is the true enemy? Even if you believe Van Til mistaken on many fronts, is he (and those who appreciate his work) the real enemy?

Reactions: Like 6 | Edifying 2 | Amen 2


----------



## SolaScriptura (Oct 17, 2021)

Yeah, the apparent bitterness between the camps seems incredible to me. Kind of functionally undermines all of them in my opinion. I’m convinced that the best use of apologetics is to strengthen the faith of believers, so quit warring over it.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## ClarionUK (Oct 17, 2021)

Out of curiosity, is it possible to have an overview of what specifically people are taking fault with regarding Van Til?

But yes, I agree. People are needling for a crack in the armour without fragmenting it ourselves.


----------



## Ed Walsh (Oct 17, 2021)

I decided to post this here because of the title of this thread. And because if I started yet another thread on the missing power in the Church to do the greater things Jesus mentioned, few would read it, and very few would respond.

~~~~~~~

This afternoon, I heard a great sermon by Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones called Revival Sermon: To Know Him.
This sermon answered many questions I have had about how we are doing as the Church these days.

In a recent, very thoughtful thread started by Steve Rafalsky @Jerusalem Blade titled, The Person of the Holy Spirit in our lives – questions and discernment, which met with almost total disinterest. So I did some research. Then I bumped the thread and wrote the following observation.

Why I bumped this thread:​​I have searched the PB and noticed that topics about the special, occasional work or filling of the Holy Spirit meet with pretty ho-hum responses. There seems to be little interest in the subject. Threads that bring up the subject are not too common and often get only two or three posts. One cessationist brother argued strongly with me against there being such a thing as a further work of the Holy Spirit.​​I admit that I am puzzled by this apparent lack of curiosity.​
Here's the publisher's summary of MLJ's sermon:

To what extent do you know God? Do you seek to know Him and His love that surpasses all knowledge? Christians should pray Paul's prayer in Ephesians 3:16-19 for themselves and for the Church. Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones explains how we are like the Laodicean church, thinking we are rich when we are poor. We are blind to our true spiritual state. But, "we must have a true concern for the glory of God." Preliminary to revival is a thirst for God. In this exposition of Genesis 26:17-18, Dr. Lloyd-Jones reveals the Church's need for vital living water, much like the need of water Isaac had from the wells of Abraham. She must be careful of serious hindrances to that flow of water such as dead orthodoxy, failure to seek God, to know God, and to apply the truth. We must also examine ourselves in light of Scripture. There is a right and a wrong way of self-examination and our orthodoxy determines which way we will go. The Christian should never be depressed or miserable, but some Christians are because of a wrong self-examination. When we truly know Christ, our sins will drive us to Him, not further from Him. Dr. Lloyd-Jones concludes that this comes with our desperate need for prayer, for a man who is burdened is a man who prays.​
Like it or not, I'm not going to go away. There is a crying need for us to realize that we are all but powerless to wadge the war on unbelief and see victories for our Great King Jesus. We have grown too comfortable and seem to have lost sight that there is more of God to be had than what we consider the status quo.

All you need to know about me is summed up in my signature - Isaiah 62:6-7


----------



## RamistThomist (Oct 17, 2021)

I don't think he is the enemy. I think he is wrong, but I otherwise like the guy. I've probably spent more time evaluating and analyzing his writings than most Van Tillians have. I actually like what he said on represenational and covenantal categories. In any case, here are all the reviews I've done on Van Til.





Van Til: Survey Christian Epistemology


Typical van Til book. Numerous interesting insights on Greek philosophy. Sort of spirals out of control on Idealism as he (likely) tried to fit his dissertation into three chapters. Abstractness and Greek Epistemology For Plato “abstract” is the opposite of empirical (33). The sense-world is...




puritanboard.com









Van Til: Psychology of Religion


Van Til is hard to read to begin with. This book is harder than most, but not necessarily because it is by Van Til. It is because it is about the psychology of religion, particularly an analysis of what secularists have to say about religion. Granted, it is probably out of date, but that is...




puritanboard.com









Frame: Cornelius Van Til: An analysis of his thought


by John Frame. Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing, 1995. This is my second time to read through this book. The question obviously arises: should you read this book or Bahnsen’s book on Van Til? They are two different books dealing with two different approaches. Bahnsen’s book is a manual on...




puritanboard.com









Van Til: A Christian Theory of Knowledge


Some of this will be my own reflections on CvT's A Christian Theory of Knowledge and the rest will be towards a construction of anti-scale of being philosophy. I am not reviewing the whole book because it's unnecessary. Why do a review of any CvT work after Bahnsen's magnum opus? Further, the...




puritanboard.com

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## RamistThomist (Oct 17, 2021)

I also look up to Van Til on piety. As I mature as a churchman, I think Van Til got a lot right on the covenantal nurture of sanctification. I just wish Van Til's followers wouldn't circle the wagons any time someone criticizes an aspect of his thought. 

And to show that I try to understand his thought, I did an analytical outline of the first part of Bahnsen's reader, which I've since given away.








Intro notes to Bahnsen


One of my goals this summer was to do an analytical outline to Bahnsen’s Van Til reader. That demands more energy than time left in the summer. But I didn’t want the project to hang s…




tentsofshem.wordpress.com


----------



## RamistThomist (Oct 17, 2021)

This evening I went and reread all my notes on Van Til from the last 8 years. If you take away his narrower focus on apologetics, I am fully on board with him. I simply think he is wrong on apologetics. Or more precisely, I don't think his specific arguments work. His stuff on theology in general, particularly anthropology, is quite good.

And he was an outstanding lecturer and preacher.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## SolaScriptura (Oct 17, 2021)

What’s vastly more impressive is how the media works with the Biden administration so that as soon as he goes off script or starts blubbering, they cut the feed. Way more impressive than Van Til.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 17, 2021)

SolaScriptura said:


> What’s vastly more impressive is how the media works with the Biden administration so that as soon as he goes off script or starts blubbering, they cut the feed. Way more impressive than Van Til.



"At least Van Til did not write mean tweets."

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## yeutter (Oct 17, 2021)

What is Van Til known for?
1. His presuppositional approach to apologetics
2. His restatement of the Christian Reformed Church understanding of Common Grace
3. The Clark / Van Til controversy concerning the incomprehensibility and knowability of God

Most peoples introduction to Van Til is his controversial positions on these questions.
Sadly most peoples introduction to VanTil is not his critique of Barth, or Brunner, or of his critique of the shortfalls of Baptist, or Lutheran theology. 
Like Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield, Van Til did not right a complete systematics. Had he written one Van Til would have called it a dogmatics. So Van Til gets read through the eyes of those who stood in his tradition, who did write a systematics


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Oct 18, 2021)

CVT deserves to be studied and remembered as an important contribution to the field of Apologetics, especially of Reformed Christian religion in the 20th Century when he was active, and when his efforts were formulated, organized, and directed against the specific hostilities and debates current in his time. He is neither the first, nor the last word in Apologetics, and to treat him as such decontextualizes him, abstracting his work from the actual contentions and battles in which he was a contributor and soldier.

Justin Martyr and Tertullian wouldn't be the grand old men of aplogetics they are, if their works were offered up in the context of debates of Late Byzantines or medieval Western Europe. Medieval Rome's Aquinas bore critique from VanTil that Bishop Butler would not have leveled. Would Aquinas or Anselm have even understood CVT's use of Idealism's terminology used by him to critique modern (20th C) philosophy, including Idealism itself? We contend for the faith in the days and in the arenas for which Providence has appointed us. And we let the critics have at us when our day is past. There is no way any man perfectly avoided being a "man of his era," assuming he ever intended or hoped his work would be timeless.

These men are all beyond our anachronistic judgments. Give them a respectful hearing, judge their work severely as they may deserve it, while not failing to admire their best and most lasting insights.

Reactions: Like 2


----------

