Van Til site: Christianciv.com

Discussion in 'Apologetical Methods' started by BayouHuguenot, Dec 13, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Christian Civilization

    excellent analysis of van til. Slight Reconstructionist slant, which is to be expected since the CRs are the most consistent van tillians.
     
  2. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    Good stuff Jacob. :cheers2:
     
  3. ReformationArt

    ReformationArt Puritan Board Freshman

  4. Me Died Blue

    Me Died Blue Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    :worms:
     
  5. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Sorry, that was tongue in cheek, even though some respected critiques of Christian Reconstruction have said the same thing in different words. I won't push it beyond that.
     
  6. ReformationArt

    ReformationArt Puritan Board Freshman

    Hey, that's the first time I've seen the "can of worms" used. Excellent! :lol:
     
  7. SouthernHero

    SouthernHero Puritan Board Freshman

    Wow, that's an awesome site.
     
  8. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    I guess my point was this:

    If you agree with Van Til that the Bible speaks to all of life authoritatively (Defense of the Faith, page 7, and you agree with the central Van Tillian premise of no neutrality, then you sound very much like a Christian Reconstructionist.
     
  9. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    Van Tillian epistemology (i.e. we can have no true knowledge of anything independent of God) leads us back to the Biblical blueprints for law, politics, education, welfare, economics etc. Therefore, one who truly embraces Van Tillian epistemology and combines it with a postmillennial faith, will be a Christian Reconstructionist.
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2007
  10. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    I just go back to the van til quote in Defense of the Faith, page 7. I ask non-theonomic van tillians to read it aloud. There are a few modern Reformed theologians who keep saying they can be van tillian and "neutral." I keep responding with "I can show you the page where Van Til explicitly repudiates that."
     
  11. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    Not if you happen to also believe that the Bible wasn't written to provide a blueprint for law, politics, education, welfare, economics, etc., but only to equip the man of God to do God's will in whatever sphere of life providence leads him into. But I do think it's true that if you combine VanTillian epistemology with a utopian faith and a somewhat romantic notion of American's Christian past that you willl more than likely be a Christian Reconstructionist.
     
  12. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    Since I believe that there will always some be unsaved men and non-Christian nations, nor do I have a romantic notion of America's Christian past, nor do I believe that Biblical blueprints will be perfectly applied in this life, then I am not a utopian.
     
  13. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    1: I am a premillennialist, so your utopian comment doesn't come close to touching my position.
    2: Even if the bible's purpose wasn't to be a "blueprint" (I never said it was), it can still provide good guidance on matters of law, economics, monetary policy, sex, etc.
    3: As to the "romantic American Christian past," that, too, is a non-starter (since Daniel isn't American). Anyway, we can argue quotations and sources on America's Christian past and I am comfortable of the truth of my position. But even assuming I am wrong (and I dont think I am), my original comment still stands.
     
  14. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    :up: My statement was merely intended to show the silliness of laying out consistency tests.
     
  15. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    It is not silly when it points out contradictions in someone's ethical position.

    P1: I am a van tillian.
    P1a: Van Til denied neutrality.
    P2: I believe in neutrality.
    --------------------
    There is a contradiction between P1 and P2.
     
  16. Southern Presbyterian

    Southern Presbyterian Moderator Staff Member

    :popcorn:
     
  17. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    That's true, Jacob; but to say that non-neutrality consistently leads to Christian Reconstruction is far-fetched.
     
  18. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    I don't think it is far-fetched. Ok, we'll compromise. It doesn't lead to Christian Reconstruction, but in the current Reformed scene such a person is using language that sounds eerily like Christian Reconstruction (and for the record, I don't really consider myself CR).
     
  19. ReformationArt

    ReformationArt Puritan Board Freshman

    Has your eschatological view changed? When looking up this topic in past threads, I found a post where you say you're postmil: http://www.puritanboard.com/f46/van-til-s-millennial-position-2579/ :scratch:
     
  20. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Yes, this summer I became historic premillennial--but I don't press it beyond that. I am a premillennialist in terms of Revelation 20 (won't debate that here) but I sound kind of postmil in terms of apologetics and cultural engagement. But yes, Russell Moore of SBTS changed my millennial position in his book, The Kingdom of Christ
     
  21. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    interesting site - I posted some of the content on chritsianskepticism.org, thanks!
     
  22. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    The main problem I have with the site is that they have been promising to update it for almost 2 years now!
     
  23. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    I bet it is the problem of desire vs. priorities! :lol:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page