RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Than thats a methodological disagreement over the argument. I say your subjective preferences are valid, use what you like. I never criticize, as far as I'm aware, classical apologetics. In fact I think I've said many times I favor Frame's critique of Van Til here. For the record I would stand shoulder to shoulder with you defending the faith. We need to get past this infighting and make an effort to understand one another.
I guess since I learned under the older school of presup (Van Til, Rushdoony, North, Bahnsen) that we always said that classical apologetics is autonomous godless reasoning. I'm glad that presups are now moving away from that rhetoric.