# The Presbyterian Philosopher: The Authorized Biography of Gordon H. Clark



## Stephen L Smith (Jun 8, 2017)

Just wondering - has anyone read this biography? If so, What did you think of it? Does it give a spiritually profitable analysis of the disagreement between Van Til and Clark? Thanks.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jun 9, 2017)

Anyone got any insight? I understand there are a number on this board that have been blessed by the ministry of Gordon Clark.


----------



## Ed Walsh (Jun 9, 2017)

Stephen L Smith said:


> Anyone got any insight?



So that you're not a lonely poster...
I just got the book, but other studies have kept me from reading it so far. Sorry, I can't help you yet.

Ed


----------



## greenbaggins (Jun 9, 2017)

The author emailed me about the project some years back in order to get my father's contact information, since Gordon Clark and my father were best friends at Covenant College. They played a lot of chess together. I have not read the entirety of the book, but from what I have seen so far (my father got me a copy of it, and he is quoted in the book), it is an outstanding biography of one of the greatest philosophical historians ever to set pen to paper. I have not read his treatment of the Van Til/Clark controversy, so I cannot comment on that. But I am sure that it is very much a worthwhile read.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## yeutter (Jun 9, 2017)

I look forward to reading it to see the authors understanding of the relationship between Oliver Buswell and Gordon Clark.


----------



## Wayne (Jun 9, 2017)

Thomas: Can you please expound on that statement? Why that interest? What would you expect to see, or what do you think was the significance of the Buswell - Clark connection?

On a related note, see the interchange between those two men that appeared on the pages of The Bible Today:

_Prior to the series of articles on presuppositionalism that appeared in _THE BIBLE TODAY, _there was about a year earlier another series begun by Dr. Buswell when he reviewed _A CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY,_ by Dr. Gordon H. Clark. This series of exchanges between Buswell and Clark will include the following:_

*Articles in the Buswell-Clark Series :*
1. “A Christian Philosophy of History: A Book Review,” by J. Oliver Buswell, Jr., _The Bible Today _41.1 (October 1947): 3-15.
2. “Dr. Clark Comments,” by Gordon H. Clark, _The Bible Today _41.3 (December 1947): 67-70.
3. ”Dr. Clark’s Comments—Editorial Note,” by J. Oliver Buswell, Jr., _The Bible Today _41.3 (December 1947): 70-74.
4. “Does the Bible Sanction Apologetic?,” by Vernon Grounds, _The Bible Today _41.3 (December 1947): 84-89.
4. “Concerning System and Demonstration,” by Gordon H. Clark, _The Bible Today _41.4 (January 1948): 109-114.
5. ”Editorial Comment,” by J. Oliver Buswell, Jr., _The Bible Today _41.4 (January 1948): 114-118.
6. “System and Induction,” by Gordon H. Clark, _The Bible Today _41.6 (March 1948): 173-177.

*On a related note, see also these articles by the Rev. David S. Clark, father of Gordon H. Clark :*
1. The Philosophical Basis of Christianity, by Rev. David S. Clark, _The Presbyterian _94.50 (11 December 1924): 6-7.
2. Modernism and the Higher Criticism, by Rev. David S. Clark, D.D., _The Presbyterian _95.1 (1 January 1925): 8-9.


----------



## yeutter (Jun 9, 2017)

Wayne: Thanks for the link to the pages of The Bible Today.
A friend, Bible Presbyterian Pastor in Thailand, is a great fan of Dr. Buswell's systematic theology. He told me, that Dr. Francis Schaeffer complained about Dr. Clark, then a Philosophy professor at Wheaton, to Dr. Buswell, then the President of Wheaton. The gist of the complaint was that Dr. Clark was encouraging Wheaton students to go to Westminster Seminary instead of Faith Seminary. Dr. Buswell refused to take the complaint seriously. My friend observed that it is well known that Dr. Clark and Dr. Buswell disagreed with each other on a number of philosophical and theological issues but Dr. Buswell had great respect for Dr. Clark. Dr. John H. Gerstner and Dr. Addison Leitch are two other men that had some significant disagreements with Dr. Clark; yet held him in very high esteem.



Wayne said:


> Thomas: Can you please expound on that statement? Why that interest? What would you expect to see, or what do you think was the significance of the Buswell - Clark connection?
> 
> On a related note, see the interchange between those two men that appeared on the pages of The Bible Today:
> 
> ...


----------



## Ed Walsh (Jun 10, 2017)

Well, you all inspired me. I started this morning and I up to chapter four. Enjoying it so far.


----------



## Ed Walsh (Jun 11, 2017)

Ed Walsh said:


> Well, you all inspired me. I started this morning, and I am up to chapter four.



Now I'm on chapter 6.
Chapter 5, "The Origins of Presuppositionalism" was my favorite so far.


----------



## Pilgrim (Jun 12, 2017)

yeutter said:


> Wayne: Thanks for the link to the pages of The Bible Today.
> A friend, Bible Presbyterian Pastor in Thailand, is a great fan of Dr. Buswell's systematic theology. He told me, that Dr. Francis Schaeffer complained about Dr. Clark, then a Philosophy professor at Wheaton, to Dr. Buswell, then the President of Wheaton. The gist of the complaint was that Dr. Clark was encouraging Wheaton students to go to Westminster Seminary instead of Faith Seminary. Dr. Buswell refused to take the complaint seriously. My friend observed that it is well known that Dr. Clark and Dr. Buswell disagreed with each other on a number of philosophical and theological issues but Dr. Buswell had great respect for Dr. Clark. Dr. John H. Gerstner and Dr. Addison Leitch are two other men that had some significant disagreements with Dr. Clark; yet held him in very high esteem.



I haven't looked at it in a while, but from skimming through Buswell's Systematic Theology several years ago, my recollection is that he clearly was not any kind of presuppositionalist, many pages were taken up with proofs for God and various other things that might fall under the category of "natural theology." Some of the others at Faith Seminary, such as Allan Macrae, seem to have been evidentialists, classical apologists or some combination. Schaeffer wasn't a pure presup so maybe he fit somewhere in the middle. But he would have been different had he gone somewhere like Faith from the beginning. Unless there was some "heavy hitter" at Faith that I'm not aware of, maybe Clark thought that it lacked the rigor one would find at WTS despite Clark's strong disagreement with them. Clark was also associated with the "New Evangelicalism" in the early days. I don't know if he considered himself to be a New Evangelical or not, but many of their leading lights, such as Carl Henry, were heavily influenced by him. Perhaps he thought Faith was too focused on separatist fundamentalism. WTS isn't and wasn't exactly ecumenical, but what I'd term confessional separatism isn't the same thing.

Also consider that Clark did not jump ship when Buswell, Mcintire, Schaeffer, etc. did in 1937 and remained in the OPC. So basically he took WTS "side" in that controversy. The issues hadn't changed by the time you're speaking of even if Clark had obviously had his own issues with WTS and the OPC.


----------



## VictorBravo (Jun 12, 2017)

Stephen L Smith said:


> Just wondering - has anyone read this biography? If so, What did you think of it? Does it give a spiritually profitable analysis of the disagreement between Van Til and Clark? Thanks.



No comment from me, yet, but at least your post prompted me to buy the book.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jun 13, 2017)

Thank you for all the comments. I was quite suprised that for a reputable man such as Clark the biography is less than 300 pages (Martyn Lloyd-Jones lived at the same time as Clark and his authorised biography is 1,200 pages!)

There is an interesting discussion on the Reformed Forum on the Clark/Van Til Controversy http://reformedforum.org/ctc163/


----------



## yeutter (Jun 14, 2017)

Pilgrim said:


> I haven't looked at it in a while, but from skimming through Buswell's Systematic Theology several years ago, my recollection is that he clearly was not any kind of presuppositionalist, many pages were taken up with proofs for God and various other things that might fall under the category of "natural theology." Some of the others at Faith Seminary, such as Allan Macrae, seem to have been evidentialists, classical apologists or some combination. Schaeffer wasn't a pure presup so maybe he fit somewhere in the middle. But he would have been different had he gone somewhere like Faith from the beginning. Unless there was some "heavy hitter" at Faith that I'm not aware of, maybe Clark thought that it lacked the rigor one would find at WTS despite Clark's strong disagreement with them. Clark was also associated with the "New Evangelicalism" in the early days. I don't know if he considered himself to be a New Evangelical or not, but many of their leading lights, such as Carl Henry, were heavily influenced by him. Perhaps he thought Faith was too focused on separatist fundamentalism. WTS isn't and wasn't exactly ecumenical, but what I'd term confessional separatism isn't the same thing.
> 
> Also consider that Clark did not jump ship when Buswell, Mcintire, Schaeffer, etc. did in 1937 and remained in the OPC. So basically he took WTS "side" in that controversy. The issues hadn't changed by the time you're speaking of even if Clark had obviously had his own issues with WTS and the OPC.


I agree with what you have just said but I suspect a simpler explanation may be the explanation.
I suspect Dr. Francis Schaeffer, a Bible Presbyterian at that time, was upset that Dr. Gordon Clark, an Orthodox Presbyterian at that time, was steering students away from Faith, a Bible Presbyterian school, to Westminster, a de facto Orthodox Presbyterian school. So Bible Presbyterian Dr. Schaeffer appealed to Bible Presbyterian Dr. Buswell to intervene with Dr. Clark.


----------



## Pilgrim (Jun 14, 2017)

yeutter said:


> I agree with what you have just said but I suspect a simpler explanation may be the explanation.
> I suspect Dr. Francis Schaeffer, a Bible Presbyterian at that time, was upset that Dr. Gordon Clark, an Orthodox Presbyterian at that time, was steering students away from Faith, a Bible Presbyterian school, to Westminster, a de facto Orthodox Presbyterian school. So Bible Presbyterian Dr. Schaeffer appealed to Bible Presbyterian Dr. Buswell to intervene with Dr. Clark.



It wasn't clear to me that Clark was still in the OPC in this scenario. The reason why he would direct men to WTS at that time would appear to be obvious even though it has never been officially affiliated with the OPC. 

This also was obviously before Buswell was fired from Wheaton, before the split in the BPC and before the founding of Covenant Seminary. All three of them eventually wound up in the RPCES. 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## Pilgrim (Jun 14, 2017)

Stephen L Smith said:


> Thank you for all the comments. I was quite suprised that for a reputable man such as Clark the biography is less than 300 pages (Martyn Lloyd-Jones lived at the same time as Clark and his authorised biography is 1,200 pages!)
> 
> There is an interesting discussion on the Reformed Forum on the Clark/Van Til Controversy http://reformedforum.org/ctc163/


Murray worked with MLJ and evidently had a lot more material to work with. In many ways MLJ was also much more of a major figure than Clark and had a much wider influence, not to take away anything from Clark. From what I understand this bio covers things rather thoroughly, especially for the more casual reader who maybe isn't looking for documentation or comment on everything Clark ever did. 

Muether's Van Til biography is 288 pages. 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jun 16, 2017)

Pilgrim said:


> In many ways MLJ was also much more of a major figure than Clark and had a much wider influence


----------



## yeutter (Jun 17, 2017)

Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones was an able Bible expositor and theologian. Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones was not a philosopher.
Dr. Clark was an important philosopher as well as a theologian. I suspect Dr. Clark will be remembered as a philosopher of note, long after his theological contributions have been forgotten.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 18, 2017)

Stephen L Smith said:


> I was quite suprised that for a reputable man such as Clark the biography is less than 300 pages (Martyn Lloyd-Jones lived at the same time as Clark and his authorised biography is 1,200 pages!)



That number of pages is a sensible length for a biography, especially in the modern climate. A biographer should not give a blow-by-blow account of his subject's life but summarise the main themes relating to the person in question. Other issues may be teased out more in spin-off articles.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 18, 2017)

In case it is of interest, David Engelsma has a positive review of this book in the most recent edition of the Protestant Reformed Theological Journal (pp 120-26).


----------



## TheOldCourse (Jun 18, 2017)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> In case it is of interest, David Engelsma has a positive review of this book in the most recent edition of the Protestant Reformed Theological Journal (pp 120-26).



I appreciated some of the review insofar as it stayed on the matter at hand, but then it goes:



> Recently, its “paradoxical” theology has opened up the OPC to the covenant theology of the Federal Vision. In the just judgment of God, this grievous departure from the gospel of (covenant) grace has had its origin at Westminster Seminary, with Prof. Norman Shepherd, vigorously supported by Prof. Richard Gaffin. Expelling Gordon Clark largely by the efforts of Westminster Seminary, at Westminster Seminary the OPC received Norman Shepherd. Under the influence of Westminster Seminary, the OPC has approved a covenant theology that expressly denies all the doctrines of grace of the Westminster Standards, including justification by faith alone, with special reference to the children of believers. Such is the theology of the Federal Vision.



I know the PRC isn't exactly well known for its rhetorical restraint in theological controversies, especially when common grace is even tangentially involved, but really? In what sense does the OPC approve of Federal Vision? I know John Robbins drew the same (questionable) link from Van Til to Shepherd, but at least a tip of the cap towards how the OPC afterward dealt with FV and Shepherdism ought to be called for out of honesty and charity.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 18, 2017)

I agree with you (at least to a point). In fairness, the review was David Engelsma's; I have noticed that other PRCA men are more restrained in their book reviews.


----------



## TheOldCourse (Jun 18, 2017)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> I agree with you (at least to a point). In fairness, the review was David Engelsma's; I have noticed that other PRCA men are more restrained in their book reviews.



I'll take your word for it, most of what I've read from the PRCA, apart from Hoeksema himself, has been from Engelsma so perhaps I'm painting with too broad a brush. Cammenga's opening article in that issue claiming that the doctrine common grace is "in fact the undoing of all the major positive contributions of the Reformation" doesn't seem too irenical either, however, even as I'm sympathetic to some aspects of their critiques. But we're probably getting too far afield of the subject. I just thought it was odd that Engelsma took the time to take a potshot at the OPC on an issue at best tangentially related to the subject matter of the review.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jun 18, 2017)

yeutter said:


> Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones was an able Bible expositor and theologian. Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones was not a philosopher.
> Dr. Clark was an important philosopher as well as a theologian. I suspect Dr. Clark will be remembered as a philosopher of note, long after his theological contributions have been forgotten.


Dr Lloyd-Jones read serious works of philosophy but he believed, rightly, that theology must 'feed' philosophy, not the other way round.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jun 18, 2017)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> That number of pages is a sensible length for a biography, especially in the modern climate.


That might be true in some contexts but I would argue that large biographies (the official biography for both Martyn Lloyd-Jones and Whitefield are about 1,200 pages) are very appropriate for major pastors in the church.


----------



## J. Rodriguez Jr. 1929 (Jul 1, 2017)

FYI and if any of you can help me further promote Doug Douma's work...

Podcasts which either refused or did not reply to having Doug Douma on to talk about his book, The Presbyterian Philosopher: The Authorized Biography of Gordon H. Clark (Wipf&Stock, 2017):

1 -The Reformed Forum (AKA Christ the Center) (3 WTS Graduates)
2 -Whitehorse Inn (Horton)
3 -The Dividing Line (White)
4 -Heidelcast / Office Hours (R. Scott Clark)
4 -Speaking in Public (Mohler)
5 -Glory Cloud (a Meredith Kline Podcast with C. Lee Irons as cohost)
6 -Apologia Radio (Theonomist-ish, etc)
7 -Mortification of Spin (Trueman, Todd and a Lady Bird)
8 -the new podcast Theology Simply Profound (hosts from a church called Westminster OPC located in a Suburb in Chicago

** Brave men who actually had Doug on are Tim S and Carlos M of the Bible
Thumping Wingnut Podcast


If anyone on these boards has some pull to influence or encourage some of these podcast shows to have brother Douma on to talk about his Clark book that'd be cool. Doug really prefers written reviews of his book but some of us less literate folk would love to hear him on some of these Reformed podcasts. Thanks hermanos!! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Pilgrim (Jul 1, 2017)

J. Rodriguez Jr. 1929 said:


> FYI and if any of you can help me further promote Doug Douma's work...
> 
> Podcasts which either refused or did not reply to having Doug Douma on to talk about his book, The Presbyterian Philosopher: The Authorized Biography of Gordon H. Clark (Wipf&Stock, 2017):
> 
> ...



I don't listen to many of those kinds of podcasts. But it's hardly surprising that the ones associated with Westminster Seminaries wouldn't do it b/c they are practically joined at the hip with CVT. And that describes the vast majority of what you posted. James White has another agenda and I'm not sure that he really has guests. (I don't listen to him that often, but other people coming on promoting their books isn't his thing. It's pretty much all about giving his opinion on the latest controversy he's involved in, and he's probably involved in the biggest one of his career right now.) Mohler (the program is "Thinking in Public") indirectly owes a debt to Clark through Carl F.H. Henry, but he's probably not interested in getting into the weeds with regard to the Van-Til/Clark controversy, which is probably in large part what any discussion of the book would have to entail. I think that is a somewhat irregular program that he only does a few times per year. I'm sure that a good many of the guests he's had on there don't really know who Mohler is, so maybe they seek out the guests rather than the other way around.

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## J. Rodriguez Jr. 1929 (Jul 1, 2017)

Pilgrim said:


> I don't listen to many of those kinds of podcasts. But it's hardly surprising that the ones associated with Westminster Seminaries wouldn't do it b/c they are practically joined at the hip with CVT. And that describes the vast majority of what you posted. James White has another agenda and I'm not sure that he really has guests. (I don't listen to him that often, but other people coming on promoting their books isn't his thing. It's pretty much all about giving his opinion on the latest controversy he's involved in, and he's probably involved in the biggest one of his career right now.) Mohler (the program is "Thinking in Public") indirectly owes a debt to Clark through Carl F.H. Henry, but he's probably not interested in getting into the weeds with regard to the Van-Til/Clark controversy, which is probably in large part what any discussion of the book would have to entail. I think that is a somewhat irregular program that he only does a few times per year. I'm sure that a good many of the guests he's had on there don't really know who Mohler is, so maybe they seek out the guests rather than the other way around.



You, like Sean Gerety on another occasion, did catch me. Y'all are too smart. It is hardly surprising in a sense that Douma and his book were not offered a go on the Westminster Sem dominated Reformed Podcast scene (seems like most of the better known and better put together Reformed podcasts are run by Westminsterians). One of my reasons for posting this is to see if someone else might have these guys' ear and can possibly help soften their hearts towards letting Doug on or at least getting them to let us know that they'll try to get Doug in when their schedules permit. The ulterior (and hopefully not too childish) motive / reason, though, for putting these guys and their podcasts on blast somewhat is for not letting Doug on. I thought they were peeps of more grit. I still respect them a good deal in a sense and love them too, but they are sort of a let down in this grit sense, honestly, in this Douma case at least. I know I can't completely blame them, as the saying goes and as you, Pilgrim, pointed out. We all have our presuppositions and/or beliefs, etc. Yet I wanted it to be known even if in an indirect fashion and even if merely on a forum thread that they have yet, as the kids say, to want some, or in the negative and more common phraseology, "they don't want any". Maybe they'll prove me and others wrong later on. Sounds, though, sir, that you'd have Doug on. Too bad you don't have one of these podcasts (or do you maybe?)!! Lol : ). Thanks for a good and clearly written reply, brother Pilgrim.


----------



## RamistThomist (Jul 1, 2017)

I don't know any of those guys personally. Mohler is one of the most influential Evangelicals in the Western Hemisphere. I doubt he would know who I am. White rarely does book reviews. Radio Apologia might be interested, but I don't know them.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jul 1, 2017)

Yes, I am a little sad the Westminster dominated ministies were not a little more open on this. Surely an open and honest discussion on the Clark vs Van Til emphasis would benefit all Reformed folk. I speak as someone greatly blessed by Van Til's writings.

Did you try the Reformed Forum? I listened to one of their discussions on the Van Til vs Clark debate, and they said a number of kind things about Gordon Clark.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## J. Rodriguez Jr. 1929 (Jul 1, 2017)

Stephen L Smith said:


> Yes, I am a little sad the Westminster dominated ministies were not a little more open on this. Surely an open and honest discussion on the Clark vs Van Til emphasis would benefit all Reformed folk. I speak as someone greatly blessed by Van Til's writings.
> 
> Did you try the Reformed Forum? I listened to one of their discussions on the Van Til vs Clark debate, and they said a number of kind things about Gordon Clark.



Greetings brother. We did try the Reformed Forum by directly having email communications with one of the main hosts as well as trying via a few other methods. Nothing came of it except some somewhat kind dialogue and small talk and a question about whether Clark ever met Jim Jones the Kool-Aid cult murderer guy.

And Amen it is sad that we can't get an audience with them. There is some competition between the parties over certain doctrines or points of theology / philosophy, but the dialogue might be helpful. And it does happen some on some FB groups for instance. Just not yet in the podcast format really

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## Pilgrim (Jul 2, 2017)

Has he been on Chris Arnzen's show?


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jul 2, 2017)

Thanks for mentioning this. Someone contacted me about this book because he lived here, attended Church where I go as well as one on the Northeast side of town, and was a Prof here at Butler University. I have read the Hoeksema book on the controversy but have retained absolutely no knowledge of it. Call it getting older and it was probably over 25 years ago. LOL. I just bought the book.


----------



## RamistThomist (Jul 2, 2017)

J. Rodriguez Jr. 1929 said:


> Nothing came of it except some somewhat kind dialogue and small talk and a question about whether Clark ever met Jim Jones the Kool-Aid cult murderer guy.



Clark himself wasn't like that, though some of his disciples give that impression. I'm in a Clarkian facebook group and they are bemoaning the lack of any true churches in the area (i.e., those that teach faith = intellectual assent).

And I am not attacking Clark or even Clarkians. Some of Van Til's disciples can be just as cultish.


----------



## Pilgrim (Jul 2, 2017)

ReformedReidian said:


> Clark himself wasn't like that, though some of his disciples give that impression. I'm in a Clarkian facebook group and they are bemoaning the lack of any true churches in the area (i.e., those that teach faith = intellectual assent).
> 
> And I am not attacking Clark or even Clarkians. Some of Van Til's disciples can be just as cultish.



Taken in the most charitable light since I've got nothing else to go on, I think the Indianapolis connection may be how Jim Jones figured into the conversation. (Some may not be aware that Jones started out in Indianapolis, then moved to SF and on to Jonestown.)


----------



## J. Rodriguez Jr. 1929 (Jul 2, 2017)

Pilgrim said:


> Taken in the most charitable light since I've got nothing else to go on, I think the Indianapolis connection may be how Jim Jones figured into the conversation. (Some may not be aware that Jones started out in Indianapolis, then moved to SF and on to Jonestown.)



That's right I think. One of the Reformed Forum hosts always had wondered if Clark ever ran into Jones at Butler I think. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## J. Rodriguez Jr. 1929 (Jul 16, 2017)

Here's the most recent interview Doug had regarding his Clark bio: https://caffeinatedthoughts.com/2017/07/caffeinated-thoughts-radio-7-15-17-doug-douma-mike-ericson/


Jay
Member, OPC
Texas


----------



## J. Rodriguez Jr. 1929 (Jul 16, 2017)

And here is another interview done a few months back: http://biblethumpingwingnut.com/201...ma-the-presbyterian-philosopher-gordon-clark/


Jay
Member, OPC
Texas


----------



## J. Rodriguez Jr. 1929 (Jul 18, 2017)

Doug Douma has a new book out besides his Clark Bio

You can get his latest book through the Trinity Foundation. 


Jay
Member, OPC
Texas


----------



## J. Rodriguez Jr. 1929 (Jul 28, 2017)

Trying to revive this thread some. See the following conference info and comment if the Spirit so leads you. Danke!

The Reformation of Apologetics Conference by the Reformed Forum guys, brethren...

"This year marks the five-hundredth anniversary of the beginning of the Reformation. Yet 2017 also marks the thirtieth anniversary of the death of Cornelius Van Til. In this conference, we will seek to demonstrate how Van Til consistently applied the theological principles of the Reformation to apologetics. We will then proceed to argue that covenantal apologetics, best exemplified by Van Til, is the necessary development and true heir of the Reformation."

Clark not exactly the true heir? 


http://reformedforum.org/events/conference/


Jay
Member, OPC
Texas


----------



## RamistThomist (Jul 29, 2017)

J. Rodriguez Jr. 1929 said:


> Trying to revive this thread some. See the following conference info and comment if the Spirit so leads you. Danke!
> 
> The Reformation of Apologetics Conference by the Reformed Forum guys, brethren...
> 
> ...



Clark's view of univocal knowledge probably counts him out on that point.

Reactions: Like 1


----------

