# What/who have you read?



## kalawine (Oct 7, 2008)

Having been introduced to Presuppositional Apologetics by Dr. Gordon Clark (thanks to Dr. Bob Morey) I have noticed (since being a member of the Puritan Board) quite a bias toward anything/anyone Clarkian. I know that Robbins could sometimes come on like sandpaper but Robbins aside... I want to know... How many of you (Van Tillian or Clarkian) have actually read anything from the "other side." 
I have spent some time recently listening to old MP3's of Van Til and to be honest, I see where they (Clark and Van Til) were both really in battle with the liberals of their day. Before he died, Dr. Ronald Nash (a Clark leaning, yet not dogmatic theologian/philosopher) said that he could imagine both of them in heaven right now hugging and apologizing and making amends. Then he says, "But then Clark would smile and say, "But I was right!"  

Rev. Bruce wrote:

I have to agree with Davidus in this respect:

It it pointless to just toss out an "I think Clark was unconfessional" blast, which ends up just sounding like a person bias instead of a reasoned and thoughtful reply to a perceived error.

I'm just left wondering, Ken, if you have read and studied Clark out on the topic, and come to this conclusion, or if that comment is simply fueled by reading some partisan on the VT side, whose opinion you value and respect?

I'm more more VT (I think), but I don't think that labeling helps anyone come to an informed opinion. So few of us can carry on discussion of the subject at that level anyway. Give people something to read, not a mere put-down.


----------



## Grymir (Oct 7, 2008)

I'm an Ayn Randian who reads them both!


----------



## MW (Oct 7, 2008)

I can appreciate both and follow neither.


----------



## kalawine (Oct 7, 2008)

Grymir said:


> I'm an Ayn Randian who reads them both!



 Yea, yea... I hear ya!


----------



## VictorBravo (Oct 7, 2008)

armourbearer said:


> I can appreciate both and follow neither.



Same here. I almost would vote that I was a Dabneyan who has read a lot of Clark and Van Til.


----------



## kalawine (Oct 7, 2008)

armourbearer said:


> I can appreciate both and follow neither.



That is probably the best bet!


----------



## MW (Oct 7, 2008)

Joshua said:


> armourbearer said:
> 
> 
> > I can appreciate both and follow neither.
> ...



Sorry for repeating you, Joshua; I didn't see your response. I prefer yours -- first in best dressed!


----------



## Beth Ellen Nagle (Oct 7, 2008)

victorbravo said:


> armourbearer said:
> 
> 
> > I can appreciate both and follow neither.
> ...



What is a Dabneyan?


----------



## kalawine (Oct 7, 2008)

Beth Ellen Nagle said:


> victorbravo said:
> 
> 
> > armourbearer said:
> ...



 I think he follows Dabney.


----------



## VictorBravo (Oct 7, 2008)

kalawine said:


> Beth Ellen Nagle said:
> 
> 
> > victorbravo said:
> ...



Right.


----------



## MW (Oct 7, 2008)

victorbravo said:


> armourbearer said:
> 
> 
> > I can appreciate both and follow neither.
> ...



Yes; Dabney's common sense approach stands just about in the middle of the two systems, denying contradiction while acknowleding human limitation.


----------



## kalawine (Oct 7, 2008)

armourbearer said:


> victorbravo said:
> 
> 
> > armourbearer said:
> ...



I need to check him out. I've read a lot of quotes in other books/essays. But I've never read Dabney. Any books to recommend?


----------



## Beth Ellen Nagle (Oct 7, 2008)

victorbravo said:


> kalawine said:
> 
> 
> > Beth Ellen Nagle said:
> ...



Well, yes I know... heh But what distinguishes him from Clark/VanTil when it comes to epistemology?


----------



## MW (Oct 7, 2008)

kalawine said:


> I need to check him out. I've read a lot of quotes in other books/essays. But I've never read Dabney. Any books to recommend?



Chris Coldwell sells Dabney's Sensualistic Philosophy; I highly recommend it. Besides shedding light on some epistemic debates of today, it also corrects some erroneous ethical notions which have come in the back door via Jonathan Edwards.


----------



## Grymir (Oct 7, 2008)

Mega-Dittos to the Sensualistic Philosophy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## kalawine (Oct 7, 2008)

armourbearer said:


> kalawine said:
> 
> 
> > I need to check him out. I've read a lot of quotes in other books/essays. But I've never read Dabney. Any books to recommend?
> ...



Gotta check it out! Thanks AB!


----------



## VictorBravo (Oct 7, 2008)

Support your local PB publisher! It is a great book.

R. L. Dabney: The Sensualistic Philosophy | Naphtali Press


----------



## kalawine (Oct 7, 2008)

victorbravo said:


> Support your local PB publisher! It is a great book.
> 
> R. L. Dabney: The Sensualistic Philosophy | Naphtali Press



Will do! Thanks for the link brother! It WILL be used!


----------



## nicnap (Oct 7, 2008)

armourbearer said:


> I can appreciate both and follow neither.



Yep. Notice my avatar.


----------



## Davidius (Oct 7, 2008)

I couldn't find a good choice. I've read both, and can't decide which I am, or am neither.


----------



## nicnap (Oct 7, 2008)

Also get Dabney's _Practical Philosophy_.


----------



## kalawine (Oct 7, 2008)

nicnap said:


> armourbearer said:
> 
> 
> > I can appreciate both and follow neither.
> ...



Yep! Schaefer chose them both to some degree.


----------



## Grymir (Oct 7, 2008)

Yes! Schaefer's approach has served me well. Although I like VanTil and Clark, Schaefer has influenced me the most.


----------



## Scott1 (Oct 8, 2008)

It's hard to imagine.

A few months ago, before Puritan Board, I would have thought Klineans, Clarkians and Van Tillians were on Star Trek!


----------



## Calvin'scuz (Oct 8, 2008)

In layman's terms...what was the basic debate between the two?


----------



## kalawine (Oct 9, 2008)

Calvin'scuz said:


> In layman's terms...what was the basic debate between the two?



Maybe this old PB link will help you get started.

http://www.puritanboard.com/f49/clark-van-til-4234/

Here are a couple more links that lean toward my bias on the issue .

Hoeksema - The Clark-Van Til Controversy

Whatever happened to Van Til & Clark?


----------

