Westminster California and Presuppositional Apologetics

[Josh Valdix]

I just finished reading the book Where In The World is The Church by Michael Horton. In chapter six Horton advocates Common Sense Realism. I know that Horton is a professor of apologetic at Westminster California, and I had previously assumed he was Van Tillian. My question is, what is the position of the Westminster California as to apologetically method? I ask because I intend to apply for admission next year (IRBS).

 

[mjmacvey]

I just finished reading the book Where In The World is The Church by Michael Horton. In chapter six Horton advocates Common Sense Realism. I know that Horton is a professor of apologetic at Westminster California, and I had previously assumed he was Van Tillian. My question is, what is the position of the Westminster California as to apologetically method? I ask because I intend to apply for admission next year (IRBS).

Josh,

All of the WSC faculty is (required to be) Van Tillian/Presuppositional, however, Horton's views have definitely developed on this issue. I don't think he adopted presuppositional approach until he had completed his doctoral work in the mid/late 90's, likely after that book was published. I don't have access to it right now, but I will definitely take a look and try to ask him about that chapter.

Mike teaches the "Christian Mind" (into to theology/apologetics) course from a presupositional perspective, but he does emphasize the utility of evidences more than some Van Tillians. Van Til's "The Defense of the Faith" is the primary textbook for the course.

Shoot me an email if I can be of further help: [email protected]

 

[RamistThomist]

Common Sense Realism isn't a style of apologetics. It is a mode of human knowing. It asks (and answers) different questions than presup.

 

[Irish Presbyterian]

Michael Horton contributed a chapter to the book 'Revelation and Reason' (Edited by K. Scott Oliphint and Lane Tipton). His chapter (7) is entitled 'Consistently Reformed: The Inheritance and Legacy of Van Til's Apologetic'

 

[VictorBravo]

All of the WSC faculty is (required to be) Van Tillian/Presuppositional

Really? I hadn't heard of this requirement. Is it a published stance?

 

[RamistThomist]

All of the WSC faculty is (required to be) Van Tillian/Presuppositional

Really? I hadn't heard of this requirement. Is it a published stance?

Kind of. I don't think you will find it in the bylaws, but I don't think you will find Clarkians on it, either.

 

[Josh Valdix]

Mark,
Thank you for the clarification. The book was published in '95 so you are correct.

 

[Josh Valdix]

Common Sense Realism isn't a style of apologetics. It is a mode of human knowing. It asks (and answers) different questions than presup.

Makes sense, looking back at the chapter he seems to argue for evidentialism on the grounds of common sense realism,one of his main argument in the chapter was that we need to recover common sense realism as it requires that "skeptics and believers argue their cases on the same basis of intellectual inquiry."


Also at the end of the chapter he acknowledged that he had not sufficiently argued for evidentialism as he had not interacted with Van Til or Clark.

 

[mjmacvey]

All of the WSC faculty is (required to be) Van Tillian/Presuppositional

Really? I hadn't heard of this requirement. Is it a published stance?

It is in the faculty handbook (not public) and used as a criteria for hiring decisions. It is not in the faculty pledge (which was adopted from WTS). It is listed as a distinctive on our website, but I am not aware of it being published elsewhere.

 

[Alan D. Strange]

Thanks, Mark.

I don't know if someone from WTS will reply; I don't pretend to speak for them in any official capacity. But as an alum of that institution I have always understood that to be their policy as well.

Peace,
Alan

 

[jwright82]

I started a thread years ago on the same thing and R Scott Clark responded, he is a faculty member out there, that they are Vantillian.