17
April 1987 A.D. Mr. (Rev.
Dr. Prof.) Cornelius “Uncle Cornie” Van Til passed to glory.
Cornelius Van Til (May 3, 1895 – April 17, 1987) was a Christian philosopher, Reformed theologian, and presuppositional
apologist.
Biography
Van Til (born Kornelis van Til in
Grootegast, Netherlands) was the sixth son of Ite van Til, a dairy
farmer, and his wife Klasina van der Veen.[1] At the age of ten,
he moved with his family to Highland, IN. He was the first of his family to receive a higher
education. In 1914 he attended Calvin Preparatory School,
graduated from Calvin College, and attended one
year at Calvin Theological
Seminary, where he studied under Louis
Berkhof, but he transferred to Princeton
Theological Seminary and later graduated with
his PhD from Princeton University.
He began teaching at Princeton
Seminary, but shortly went with the conservative group that founded Westminster
Theological Seminary, where he taught for
forty-three years of his life. He taught apologetics and systematic theology
there until his retirement in 1972 and continued to teach occasionally until
1979. He was also a minister
in the Orthodox
Presbyterian Church from the 1930s until his death in
1987, and in that denomination, he was embroiled in a bitter dispute with Gordon
Clark over God's incomprehensibility known as the Clark–Van
Til Controversy in which, according to Van Til's
pupil John Frame, neither man was at his best and neither quite understood the other's
position.
Thought
Van Til drew upon the works of Dutch Calvinist philosophers such as D. H. Th. Vollenhoven, Herman Dooyeweerd,
and Hendrik G. Stoker
and theologians such as Herman
Bavinck and Abraham
Kuyper to bring together a fresh, decidedly Reformed approach
to Christian apologetics, which opposed the traditional methodology of reasoning on the supposition
that there is a neutral middle-ground, where the non-Christian and the
Christian can agree.[2] His attempted
contribution to the Neo-Calvinist approach of
Dooyeweerd, Stoker and others, was to insist that the "ground motive"
of a Christian philosophy must be derived from the historical terms of the
Christian faith. In particular, the Trinity is of indispensable and insuperable value to a Christian philosophy.
In Van Til: The Theologian, John Frame, a sympathetic critic of Van Til, describes Van Til's contributions to Christian thought
as comparable in magnitude to those of Immanuel
Kant in non-Christian philosophy. He indicates that Van Til
identified the disciplines of systematic theology and apologetics, seeing the former as a positive statement of the
Christian faith and the latter as a defense of that statement – "a difference
in emphasis rather than of subject matter." Frame summarizes Van Til's
legacy as one of new applications of traditional doctrines:
Unoriginal as his doctrinal
formulations may be, his use of those formulations – his application
of them – is often quite remarkable. The sovereignty of God becomes an epistemological, as well as a religious and metaphysical principle. The Trinity becomes the answer to the
philosophical problem of the one and the many. Common grace becomes the key to
a Christian philosophy of history. These new applications of familiar doctrines inevitably increase
[Christians'] understanding of the doctrines themselves, for [they] come
thereby to a new appreciation of what these doctrines demand of [them].[3]
Similarly, Van Til's innovative
application of the doctrines of total
depravity and the ultimate authority of God led to his reforming
of the discipline of apologetics. Specifically, he denied neutrality on the
basis of the total depravity of man and the invasive effects of sin on man's
reasoning ability (as per the usual Calvinistic understanding of the first
chapter of the Epistle to the Romans), and he insisted that the Bible, which he viewed as a divinely inspired
book, be trusted preeminently because he believed the Christian's ultimate
commitment must rest on the ultimate authority of God. As Frame says elsewhere,
"the foundation of Van Til's system and its most persuasive
principle" is a rejection of autonomy since "Christian thinking, like
all of the Christian life, is subject to God's lordship".[4] However, it is
this very feature that has caused some Christian apologists to reject Van Til's
approach. For instance, D. R. Trethewie describes Van Til's system as nothing more than "a priori dogmatic
transcendental irrationalism, which he has attempted to give a Christian name
to."[5]
Kuyper–Warfield synthesis
Fideism accurately describes the
view of fellow Dutchman Abraham
Kuyper, who inspired much of Van Til's thought. Van Til is seen
as taking the side of Kuyper against his alma mater, Princeton Seminary, and
particularly against Princeton professor B.
B. Warfield. But Van Til described his approach to apologetics as a
synthesis of these two approaches: "I have tried to use elements both of
Kuyper's and of Warfield's thinking."[6] Greg
Bahnsen, a student of Van Til and one his most prominent
defenders and expositors, wrote that "A person who can explain the ways in
which Van Til agreed and disagreed with both Warfield and Kuyper, is a person
who understands presuppositional apologetics."[7]
With Kuyper, Van Til believed that the
Christian and the non-Christian have different ultimate standards,
presuppositions that color the interpretation of every fact in every area of
life. But with Warfield, he believed that a rational proof for Christianity is
possible: "Positively Hodge and Warfield were quite right in stressing the
fact that Christianity meets every legitimate demand of reason. Surely
Christianity is not irrational. To be sure, it must be accepted on faith, but
surely it must not be taken on blind faith. Christianity is capable of rational
defense."[8] And like Warfield,
Van Til believed that the Holy
Spirit will use arguments against unbelief as a means to convert
non-believers.[9]
Van Til sought a third way from Kuyper
and Warfield. His answer to the question "How do you argue with someone
who has different presuppositions?" is the transcendental
argument, an argument that seeks to prove that certain
presuppositions are necessary for the possibility of rationality. The Christian
and non-Christian have different presuppositions, but, according to Van Til,
only the Christian's presuppositions allow for the possibility of human
rationality or intelligible experience. By rejecting an absolutely rational God
that determines whatsoever comes to pass and presupposing that some
non-rational force ultimately determines the nature of the universe, the
non-Christian cannot account for rationality. Van Til claims that non-Christian
presuppositions reduce to absurdity and are self-defeating. Thus,
non-Christians can reason, but they are being inconsistent with their
presuppositions when they do so. The unbeliever's ability to reason is based on
the fact that, despite what he believes, he is God's creature living in God's
world.[10]
Hence, Van Til arrives at his famous
assertion that there is no neutral common ground between Christians and
non-Christians because their presuppositions, their ultimate principles of
interpretation, are different; but because non-Christians act and think
inconsistently with regard to their presuppositions, common ground can be
found. The task of the Christian apologist is to point out the difference in
ultimate principles, and then show why the non-Christian's reduce to absurdity.[11][12]
Transcendental argument
The substance of Van Til's
transcendental argument is that the doctrine of the ontological Trinity, which is concerned with the reciprocal relationships of the
persons of the Godhead to each other without reference to God's relationship
with creation, is the aspect of God's character that is necessary for the
possibility of rationality. R.
J. Rushdoony writes, "The whole body of Van Til's writings is
given to the development of this concept of the ontological Trinity and its
philosophical implications."[13] The ontological
Trinity is important to Van Til because he can relate it to the philosophical
concept of the "concrete universal" and the problem of the One and the many.[14]
For Van Til, the ontological Trinity
means that God's unity and diversity are equally basic. This is in contrast
with non-Christian philosophy in which unity and diversity are seen as
ultimately separate from each other:
The whole problem of knowledge has
constantly been that of bringing the one and the many together. When man looks
about him and within him, he sees that there is a great variety of facts. The
question that comes up at once is whether there is any unity in this variety,
whether there is one principle in accordance with which all these many things
appear and occur. All non-Christian thought, if it has utilized the idea of a
supra-mundane existence at all, has used this supra-mundane existence as
furnishing only the unity or the a priori aspect of knowledge, while it has maintained that the a posteriori
aspect of knowledge is something that is furnished by the universe.[15]
Pure unity with no particularity is a
blank, and pure particularity with no unity is chaos. Frame says that a blank
and chaos are "meaningless in themselves and impossible to relate to one
another. As such, unbelieving worldviews always reduce to unintelligible
nonsense. This is, essentially, Van Til's critique of secular philosophy (and
its influence on Christian philosophy)."[16]
Karl Barth
Van Til was also a strident opponent
of the theology of Karl Barth, and his opposition led
to the rejection of Barth's theology by many in the Reformed community. Despite
Barth's assertions that he sought to base his theology solely on the 'Word of
God', Van Til believed that Barth's thought was syncretic in nature and fundamentally flawed because, according to Van Til, it
assumed a Kantian epistemology, which Van Til argued was necessarily irrational and anti-Biblical.
Influence
Many recent theologians have been
influenced by Van Til's thought, including John Frame, Greg Bahnsen, Rousas John Rushdoony, Francis Schaeffer,
as well as many of the current faculty members of Westminster
Theological Seminary, Reformed Theological
Seminary, and other Reformed seminaries.
Bibliography
Some of Van Til's writings (ranked in
order of importance by K. Scott Oliphint) include:
- A Survey of Christian Epistemology (In Defense of the Faith, vol. II; available online for free) ISBN 0-87552-495-8
- An Introduction to Systematic Theology (In Defense of the Faith, vol. V) ISBN 0-87552-488-5
- Common Grace and the Gospel ISBN 0-87552-482-6
- A Christian Theory of Knowledge ISBN 0-87552-480-X
- The Defense of the Faith ISBN 0-87552-483-4
- The Reformed Pastor and Modern Thought ISBN 0-87552-497-4
- Christian-Theistic Evidences (In Defense of the Faith, vol. VI), Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1978
- The Doctrine of Scripture (In Defense of the Faith, vol. I), Copyright denDulk Christian Foundation, 1967
- The Sovereignty of Grace: An Appraisal of G.C. Berkouwer's View of Dordt, Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1975
- The New Synthesis Theology of the Netherlands, Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1976
- The Case for Calvinism ISBN 0-87552-476-1
- Essays on Christian Education ISBN 0-87552-485-0
- Psychology of Religion (In Defense of the Faith, vol. IV) ISBN 0-87552-494-X
- The New Hermeneutic ISBN 1-112-86264-1
- The Intellectual Challenge of the Gospel (pamphlet) ISBN 0-87552-487-7
- Why I Believe in God (pamphlet; available online for free), Philadelphia, Pa.: Westminster Theological Seminary, no date
- Paul at Athens (pamphlet), Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1978
- Karl Barth and Evangelicalism (pamphlet), Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1964
Additionally, Eric Sigward has edited The
Works of Cornelius Van Til, 1895-1987, CD-ROM (ISBN 0-87552-461-3),
a comprehensive collection of Van Til's writings in digital form that also
includes images and extensive audio recordings of Van Til.
Secondary sources
- William White, Jr. (1979). Van Til, defender of the faith: An authorized biography. T. Nelson Publishers. ISBN 0-8407-5670-4.
- John Frame (n.d.). Van Til the Theologian. Phillipsburg, New Jersey: Pilgrim Publishing Company. ISBN 0-916034-02-X.
- E. R. Geehan, ed. (1971). Jerusalem & Athens: Critical Discussions on the Philosophy and Apologetics of Cornelius Van Til - a Festschrift. Presbyterian and Reformed. ISBN 0-87552-489-3.
- John Frame (1995). Cornelius Van Til: An Analysis of His Thought. P & R Publishing. ISBN 978-0-87552-245-6.
- Greg Bahnsen (1998). Van Til’s Apologetic: Readings and Analysis. P & R Publishing. ISBN 0-87552-098-7.
- Jim S. Halsey (1976). For a Time Such as This: An Introduction to the Reformed Apologetics of Cornelius Van Til. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed.
- Rousas John Rushdoony (1959). By what standard? An analysis of the philosophy of Cornelius Van Til. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed (reprinted by Chalcedon, 2003). ISBN 1-879998-05-X.
- Thom Notaro (1980). Van Til and the Use of Evidence. Presbyterian and Reformed. ISBN 978-0-87552-353-8.
Further reading
- Hoeksema, Herman (1995). The Clark-Van Til Controversy. Trinity Foundation. ISBN 0-940931-44-3
References
3.
Jump up ^ John Frame (n.d.). Van
Til the Theologian.
Phillipsburg, New Jersey: Pilgrim Publishing Company. ISBN 0-916034-02-X.
12. Jump up ^ Van Til says, "We may
therefore with Kuyper speak of twofold science and yet also speak of the unity
of science. When Kuyper speaks of the twofold science he contrasts the
principle of those whose primary aim is to serve and worship the creature, with
the principle of those whose primary aim is to serve and worship the Creator"
(The Doctrine of Scripture, p. 129).
14. Jump up ^ "The ontological Trinity
will be our interpretative concept everywhere. God is our concrete universal;
in Him thought and being are coterminous, in Him the problem of knowledge is
solved. If we begin thus with the ontological Trinity as our concrete
universal, we frankly differ from every school of philosophy and from every
school of science not merely in our conclusions, but in our starting-point and
in our method as well. For us the facts are what they are, and the universals
are what they are, because of their common dependence upon the ontological
Trinity. Thus, as earlier discussed, the facts are correlative to the
universals. Because of this correlativity there is genuine progress in history;
because of it the Moment has significance" (Van Til, Common Grace and
the Gospel, p. 64, para. break deleted).
External links
- VanTil.info - writings by and about Van Til and his apologetic
- "Van Til and the Ligonier Apologetic" by John Frame from the Westminster Theological Journal, analyzing the book Classical Apologetics by R. C. Sproul, John Gerstner, and Arthur Lindsley (ISBN 0-310-44951-0), which itself includes "a friendly refutation of Cornelius Van Til's presuppositional apologetics"
- "Van Til's Challenge to Illegitimate Common Ground" by Greg Bahnsen
- "The Transcendental Argument for God's Existence", a chapter by Michael Butler from The Standard Bearer, a festschrift for Greg Bahnsen
- "Van Til and the Reformation of Apologetics" by K. Scott Oliphint
- "Reconnoitering The Theory Of Knowledge Of Prof. Dr. Cornelius Van Til", a summary and analysis of Van Til's theory of knowledge by Hendrik G. Stoker with a response by Van Til.
- "Machen, Van Til, and the Apologetical Tradition of the OPC" - an article on apologetics in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church by Greg Bahnsen
- "Common Misunderstandings of Van Til's Apologetic", part 1 and part 2 by Richard L. Pratt, Jr.
- "A Van Til Glossary" by John Frame
- A Critique of Cornelius Van Til: Being a Defence of Traditional Evidential Christian Apologetics by D. R. Trethewie
- Articles regarding Van Tillian apologetics
- "Van Til Diagrammed" by Michael H. Warren
- "Christian Civilization is the Only Civilization – In a Sense, Of Course" a restatement of Van Til's philosophical argument for the truth of Christianity by Michael H. Warren
- "Van Til in Hungarian" some books of Van Til translated and presented in PDF format
No comments:
Post a Comment