Presuppositional

Apologetics

Bernard Ramm
1916-1992

1
 According to Bernard Ramm
Varieties of Christian Apologetics

 Systems Stressing Revelation

Augustine John Calvin Abraham Kuyper

AD 354-AD 430 1509-1564 1837-1920

2
 Gordon R. Lewis
1926-2016

According to Gordon Lewis: Testing

Christianity's Truth Claims

 Biblical Authoritarianism

3
 Cornelius Van Til
1902-1985

Norman L. Geisler

4
 According to Norman Geisler:
Baker Encyclopedia of Christian
Apologetics

 Presuppositional

Revelational
Presuppositionalism

5
Cornelius Van Til John Frame Greg Bahnsen
1895-1987 1948-1995

Rational
Presuppositionalism

6
 Gordon H. Clark Carl F. H. Henry
1902-1985 1913-2003

Systematic Consistency
Presuppositionalism

7
Edward John Carnell Gordon Lewis
1919-1967 1926-2016

Practical
Presuppositionalism

8
Francis Schaeffer
1912-1984

Steven B. Cowan

9
 According to Steven B. Cowan:
Five Views on Apologetics

 Presuppositional Method

Cornelius Van Til Gordon H. Clark

1895-1987 1902-1985

Francis Schaeffer John Frame Greg Bahnsen

1912-1984 1948-1995

10
Historical Roots of
Presuppositional
Apologetics

Influences

11
 John Calvin Abraham Kuyper Herman Bavinck Geerhardus Vos
1509-1564 1837-1920 1854-1921 1862-1949

D. H. Th. Vollenhoven Herman Dooyeweerd Hendrik Gerhardus Stoker Cornelius Van Til
1899-1993
1892-1978 1894-1977 1895-1987

Princeton
Predecessors

12
Archibald Alexander Charles Hodge Archibald Alexander Hodge
1772-1851 1797-1878 1823-1886

Benjamin Breckenridge Warfield J. Gresham Machen

1851-1921
1881-1937

13
14
 John Murray Allan McRae

J. Gresham Oswald T. Allis

Cornelius
Machen
Van Til
Paul Wolley Ned Stonehouse

The Legacy of
Cornelius Van Til

15
 The legacy of Van Til endures
primarily in the reformed
camp of American Christian
evangelicalism.

Cornelius Van Til Greg Bahnsen

1895-1987 1948-1995

16
John Frame K. Scott Oliphint

Francis Schaeffer
1912-1984

17
 Nancy Pearcey

Gordon H. Clark Carl F. H. Henry

1902-1985 1913-2003

18
 The conventional view is that Van
Til's approach in apologetics
marked a shift from the standard
methodology of apologetics that
had dominated conservative
reformed thought in America in late
nineteenth and on into the
twentieth centuries by the old
Princeton Theological Seminary.

19
 The
Presuppositionalism
of
Cornelius Van Til

 The 'presupposition' in the name

Presuppositionalism does not mean that
the method merely identifies and analyzes
presuppositions.
 In this regard, Presuppositionalism would
be no different than Classical Apologetics.

20
 In Van Til's estimation, the methodology
of Presuppositionalism was necessitated
by Calvinist theology, particularly the
doctrines of the sovereignty of God and
the total depravity of the human race.

 He denied any common ground between

the believer and unbeliever.
 Van Til argued that to assume an
intellectual common ground between the
believer and unbeliever from which the
believer could launch into a rational
argument for God's existence, is de facto
to deny the God of Christianity.

21
  Van Til insisted that one must presuppose
the Triune God and the Christian
Scriptures before any sense can be made
of anything else.
 Another way to say this is that the Triune
God and the Christian Scriptures are the
pre-conditions of knowledge.

"This is, in the last analysis, the

question as to what are one's ultimate
presuppositions. When man became a
sinner he made of himself instead of
God the ultimate or final reference
point. And it is precisely this
presupposition, as it controls without
exception all forms of non-Christian
philosophy, that must be brought into
question. …

22
 "In not challenging this basic
presupposition with respect to himself
as the final reference point in
predication the natural man may
accept the "theistic proofs" as fully
valid. He may construct such proofs.
He has constructed such proofs. But
the god whose existence he proves to
himself in this way is always a god who
is something other than the self-
contained ontological trinity of
Scripture."
[The Defense of the Faith (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed
Publishing, 1979), 77]

 Sometimes the Presuppositionalist will

refer to his method as a transcendental
argument because the presupposition of
the Triune God and the Christian
Scriptures are "transcendentally
necessary" for knowledge.

23
 "The only 'proof' of the
Christian position is that
unless its truth is
presupposed there is no
possibility of 'proving'
anything at all. The actual
state of affairs as
preached by Christianity
is the necessary
foundation of 'proof'
itself."
["My Credo" in Jerusalem and Athens: Critical
Discussions on the Philosophy and
Apologetics of Cornelius Van Til (Phillipsburg:
Presbyterian and Reformed, 1971), 21]

24
 For Y to be transcendentally necessary
for X means (in this context) that in order
to know X, you have to posit Y.
 An example (though not an
uncontroversial example in this debate)
would be that logic is transcendentally
necessary for there to be any knowledge
at all.

Note that there is a difference between

saying on the one hand:
in order for one to KNOW Y,
one has to POSIT X
and saying on the other hand:
in order for there to BE Y,
there has to BE X.

25
 A key point to see here is that the
Presuppositionalist is not merely saying
that God is transcendentally necessary for
the EXISTENCE of all other things.
 No apologetic method would deny this.
Thus, to affirm this is not to say anything
that distinguishes one apologetic method
from another.

26
"Often enough we [who
believe in God] have
talked with you [who
do not believe in God]
about facts and sound
reasons as though we
agreed with you on
what these really are.

"In our arguments for

the existence of God
we have frequently
assumed that you and
we together have an
area of knowledge on
which we agree.

27
 "But we really do not
grant that you see any
fact in any dimension of
life truly. We really think
you have colored
glasses on your nose
when you talk about
chickens and cows, as
well as when you talk
about the life hereafter."
[Why I Believe in God (Philadelphia:
Westminster Theological Seminary, n.d.), 9]

A Classical
Critique of
Presuppositionalism

28
 Strengths of
Presuppositionalism

A Strong Stance on
the Authority of Scripture
A Strong View of
the Inerrancy of Scripture
A Strong Emphasis on
the Integration of Theology and
Apologetics

29
 Problems with
Presuppositionalism

The Problem of "God's

Words vs. Man's Words"

30
31
 "Shouldn't you
take outside ideas
and reinterpret
[the Bible]? No,
you can't do that."

32
 "All versions of the
gap theory impose
outside ideas on
Scripture and thus
open the door for
further compromise."

33
34
"Presuppositional apologetics
is the method of defending
the Christian faith that relies
on the Bible as the supreme
authority in all matters. … I
will show below that it is
logically inescapable that
indeed the Bible must be the
ultimate standard even when
evaluating its own claims. …
For the presuppositionalist,
the Bible is the ultimate
standard for all things, even
its own defense."
[Jason Lisle, "Young Earth Presuppositionalism," in
Christian Research Journal 11, No. 2, (Fall 2013): 65, Jason Lisle
emphasis in original]
Institute for Creation Research

Tim Chaffey Jason Lisle

35
 "When someone
'reinterprets' the clear
meaning of the words
to accommodate
outside notions, it
simply means he
Tim Chaffey Jason Lisle
does not believe the
words."

To use the "ideas of

men" when they
conflict with the Word
of God is to "place
more faith in men
Tim Chaffey Jason Lisle
than in God."

36
It seems to me that they are confusing

using "outside ideas"

to interpret the Bible
with
using "outside ideas"
to judge the Bible.

Joshua Commanding
the Sun to Stand Still

37
"Then Joshua spoke to the LORD in the
day when the LORD delivered up the
Amorites before the children of Israel, and
he said in the sight of Israel: 'Sun, stand
still over Gibeon; And Moon, in the Valley
of Aijalon.' So the sun stood still, and the
moon stopped, till the people had
revenge upon their enemies."
Joshua 10:12-13 NKJV

"When someone
'reinterprets' the clear
meaning of the words
to accommodate
outside notions, it
simply means he
Tim Chaffey Jason Lisle
does not believe the
words."

38
 "Supporters often used
a hyper-literal reading
of Joshua 10:12-13 to
buttress their position
[of geocentricism].
However, it is quite
obvious that Joshua
Tim Chaffey was simply using Jason Lisle
observational
language."

39
40
 Theology's Need for
Philosophy: God's Existence
and Attributes

The Problem of
Inconsistency

41
The Problem of Confusing
Moral Rebellion against
God with Epistemological
Disconnection from Reality

The Problem of Regarding

Philosophy as Elitist

42
 The Problem of Confusing
a Transcendental Argument
for God with a
Transcendental Argument
for Logic

The Problem of Maintaining

that Logic Is Created

43
 The Problem of Deeming
"Biblical Principles" as
Preconditions of
Intelligibility

The Problem of Ignoring

the Distinction Between the
Order of Knowing and the
Order of Being

44
 The Problem of Using
Logic Before Their System
Establishes Logic

The Problem of Confusing

Ontology and
Epistemology

45
The Problem of Confusing
Knowing Truly vs. Knowing
Exhaustively

The Problem of Failing to

Understand "Generic"
Theism

46
 The Problem of Never
Offering the
Transcendental Argument

The Problem of
Misunderstanding the
Philosophical Issue of "The
One and the Many"

47
 The Problem of
Presuppositionalism
Collapsing into Classical
Apologetics

48