# Thoughts on Greg Bahnsen



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Mar 8, 2008)

I got his work on Van Til's Apologetic recently and was wondering what others on the board thought of this book and Bahnsen generally.


----------



## ReformedDave (Mar 8, 2008)

in my opinion, he was the finest proponent of the Van Tillian apologetic. He was also a devastating debater and a wonderful preacher/teacher.....Yeah, I like the guy.


----------



## Josiah (Mar 8, 2008)

ReformedDave said:


> in my opinion, he was the finest proponent of the Van Tillian apologetic. He was also a devastating debater and a wonderful preacher/teacher.....Yeah, I like the guy.





I also highly suggest listening to this debate featuring prominent english athiest prof. Simon Blackburn and the OP minister Mark Garcia.


----------



## N. Eshelman (Mar 8, 2008)

I love Bahnsen. I am not a theonomist- but I think that his contribution to Reformed Christianity will prove to be a big one. He popularized presuppositionalism (in my opinion).


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Mar 8, 2008)

but nleshelman are you a member of the former ARP church in Grand Rapids that went RPCNA recently?


----------



## timmopussycat (Mar 8, 2008)

Bahnsen did invaluable work developing the presuppoitionalist insights independently derived by Van Til and C. S. Lewis into an effective apologetic strategy for popular evangelism. If only he had not bought into Rushdoony's "ethical perspective of Christian Reconstruction" i.e. Theonomy....


----------



## tcalbrecht (Mar 8, 2008)

timmopussycat said:


> Bahnsen did invaluable work developing the presuppoitionalist insights independently derived by Van Til and C. S. Lewis into an effective apologetic strategy for popular evangelism. If only he had not bought into Rushdoony's "ethical perspective of Christian Reconstruction" i.e. Theonomy....



I like to think he was being a consistently confessional Presbyterian.

He had much to offer, and I certainly learned much from his teaching and ministry.


----------



## Kevin (Mar 8, 2008)

A brilliant theologian. A great apologist. An effective proponent of complex theories at a popular level. And a darn nice guy!


----------



## sotzo (Mar 8, 2008)

What has always been interesting to me is that few in the nonbelieving camp would do anything more than cast stones from afar when he was alive...would never go toe to toe with him from the podium...then after his death, they all come out of the woodwork with their attacks in no danger of hearing his rebuttals.


----------



## Barnpreacher (Mar 8, 2008)

Taking his ethics course on CD was some of the most valuable and insightful study time I have ever spent. I definitely give him a  and a


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Mar 8, 2008)

Where would that be available from Barnpreacher?


----------



## Barnpreacher (Mar 8, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Where would that be available from Barnpreacher?



Mine came from Whitefield Theological Seminary. I don't know if it's available elsewhere for purchase.


----------



## Devin (Mar 8, 2008)

sotzo said:


> What has always been interesting to me is that few in the nonbelieving camp would do anything more than cast stones from afar when he was alive...would never go toe to toe with him from the podium...then after his death, they all come out of the woodwork with their attacks in no danger of hearing his rebuttals.



No kidding.

Bahnsen was a man to whom God gave a brilliant mind, and he used it well in his short stay on earth. His encouragement and application of Christianity as a comprehensive worldview has made a huge impact on a lot of folks here, myself included. For that, men like Bahnsen, VanTil, and Rushdoony should be commended.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Mar 8, 2008)

Barnpreacher said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > Where would that be available from Barnpreacher?
> ...



Thanks!!!


----------



## N. Eshelman (Mar 8, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> but nleshelman are you a member of the former ARP church in Grand Rapids that went RPCNA recently?



I am. You can read about it here.

You are quite the anomaly yourself! PCUSA to ARP studying in PTS, RPTS, and heading to Erskine! Good stuff.


----------



## Kevin (Mar 9, 2008)

Brother, I only wish you had joined the Canadian Presbytry. We needed a wider persprective. In my humble opinion.


----------



## Josiah (Mar 9, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Where would that be available from Barnpreacher?



I think you may be able to find it here.


----------



## Christusregnat (Mar 9, 2008)

Howdy All,

I'm brand-spankin new, and this is my first post.

As mentioned above, Bahnsen was a true gentleman, a scholar, and strong confessionalist. His debating skill was unparalleled, his research thorough, and his presentation inviting. In my estimation, he was head-and-shoulders above his peers.

As to the "theonomic" question, I don't think that his basic conclusions were contrary to the confession and catechism's usages of the Law (for instance, invoking Mosaic Judicials in explaining the requirements of / sins forbidden in the 10 commandments). His method of arguing those points was quite different from theirs, but the conclusions were very similar. Gillespie, for instance, would have seen many of the "judicial" laws as merely moral laws, applied to the civil sphere. In that way, resembling Rutherford's arguments in favor of executing idolaters, adulterers, etc.

Besides the controversial aspects of Bahnsen's views of the Confession, I think he is seen by Presbyterians and Reformed folk as a stalwart of the true Reformed Religion, and a devoted disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ. He has now gone to his rest, and is rejoicing in Christ, his only Savior and Master. In this way, I pray he is an example to all of us who, though disagreeing in some points of understanding, can yet profit one another, and be a blessing to all; even those with whom we may sincerely disagree.

Cheers,

Adam


----------



## Neopatriarch (Mar 9, 2008)

I've read Van Til's Apologetic and was changed by it. Still, some of it is still over my head, and it's not clear to me that you can prove the whole Christian worldview with presuppositionalism. It seems like you'll have to bring in evidences at some point.

As for his theonomy, I really appreciate that too. Could someone explain to me where Bahnsen got it wrong on this?


----------



## Craig (Mar 9, 2008)

Van Til's Apologetic is heavy reading...though Bahnsen made Van Til accessible with that work for people like me.

I found Always Readya great beginner, and I've listened to about 40 hours worth of his audio. The way he argued wan't mere cogitation for academia...he was desirous to glorify God, and was fiercely evangelistic. 

I'm not sure I'd be considered a Theonomist by other Theonomists...but Bahnsen spurred me into accepting the principles...

Bahnsen was one of the greatest men God has given us in years.


----------



## InevitablyReformed (Mar 9, 2008)

Hello,
This is my first post and the "Bahnsen" title caught my eye.
His debate with Gordon Stein was one of the more impressive two hours of intellectual dialogue I have ever heard (from Bahnsen's side that is). God gave him a wonderful mind that Bahnsen used for His glory.


----------



## Greg (Mar 9, 2008)

I've read Always Ready and have listened to a number of his lectures. I'm thankful that He was obedient to the call God gave him and that he used that gift given him for God's glory. I think the Church is very blessed by how God worked through Dr. Bahnsen's life. Dr. Bahnsen has made a very important contribution that we only stand to benefit from.


----------



## RamistThomist (Mar 9, 2008)

Bahnsen was my theological mentor, though I discovered him 8 years after his death. 

I treasure what I have learned from him, even where I take it to different areas, which is something we all should do. Bahnsen would not want us to sit around meditating over the Stein debate (and I have memorized much of it). He certainly wouldn't want us to hinge our apologetics around a few key phrases of his turning them into cliches.

It is hard to put into words how much he means to me. I disagree with him on eschatology (being one of the few theonomic premillennialists!) and I tinker with his apologetics (still holding to the same format, though). I actually think his TAG can be reconstructed (no pun intended!  ) along narratival lines. You can kill about 8 birds with that one stone. 

Sadly though, people only see him as an ethicist/apologist when his courses on the Christian life, Calvin (get that if anything! 80 lectures on John Calvin! Who said theonomists didn't like Calvin? Actually, I know who said that in an encyclopedia on Apologetics, but I digress). Also get his systematic theology tapes. Very heartwarming.


----------



## Civbert (Mar 10, 2008)

I've listen to several of his tapes and read most of his apologetics books. He's an excellent debater and speaker. I especially like how he took apart the Theory of Evolution. Bahnsen was very bright, quick, and joy to listen to.

I do have problems with some of his apologetic arguments - the transcendental argument in particular. I think it's very impressive but logically flawed. I think if Bahnsen had better understood Clark's apologetics, I would have felt better about Bahnsen's. But Bahnsen's criticism of Clark's apologetics showed a flawed understanding of Clark's. I'm not sure why he didn't 'get' Clark, but there was bad blood between Clark and Bahnsen's mentor Van Til, at that time. And maybe Bahnsen was motivated by loyalty to his mentor. But for what ever reason, it keep him from seeing how Clark's arguments were very much like his own, but with some improvements that would have benefited Bahnsen greatly. 

If you could combine Bahnsen's quick intellect and skill as a debater, with Clark's technical improvements, you'd have the über-apologist!

I am glad to have been exposed to the teachings of both men.


----------



## Answerman (Mar 10, 2008)

Greg Bahnsen is my favorite Christian teacher of the last hundred years or so. It is a blessing to have many of his lectures in audio format to pass on to future generations. I think the best description of his character was "humble boldness", a trait that I hope that every Christian would strive to emulate.


----------



## Answerman (Mar 10, 2008)

Jacob,

Can you point me to any material that you have that explains how TAG can be reconstructed along narratival lines? or give me a thumb nail sketch what you mean by this?


----------



## RamistThomist (Mar 10, 2008)

I can give you hints later when I get home. Only hints at the moment, maybe movements toward it. Narratival apologetics almost requires a prolegomena to narratival thinking. But still, on my home cache, I have some good stuff.


----------



## RamistThomist (Mar 10, 2008)

Answerman said:


> Jacob,
> 
> Can you point me to any material that you have that explains how TAG can be reconstructed along narratival lines? or give me a thumb nail sketch what you mean by this?



These are only movements twoards a narratival theology. It is not so much the prolegomena itself so if it is lacking in a few areas, keep that in mind. 


> These stories are not situated within the world: instead, for the Christian, the world is situated within these stories. They define for us what reality is, and they function as "metanarrative"...in the sense of a story privileged by faith, and seen as the key to the interpretation and regulation of all other stories...Christian knowledge is ultimately narratival: claims for objective truth, goodness, and happiness can only be made by identification with a particular form of life.



Jamie Smith, _Introducing Radical Orthodoxy_



> "Stories are, actually, peculiarly good at modifying or subverting other stories and their worldviews. Where head-on attack would certainly fail, the parable hides the wisdom of the serpent behind the innocence of the dove, gaining entrance and favour which can then be used to change assumptions which the hearer would otherwise keep hidden away for safety"



( New Testament and the People of God. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1992), 40



> "They [stories] offer answers to the origin and destiny of world history…and human life within it. The Bible is universal history…It is the true story of the world, and all other stories are at best partial narratives, which must be understood within the context of the biblical story…Since both stories (Christian and non-Christian) make comprehensive and absolute claims, only one story can be the basic and foundational story for life."



(Craig Bartholomew and Michael Goheen, "Story and Biblical Theology," Out of Egypt: Biblical Theology and Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2004), 151-152


----------

