Modest is Hottest: A Brief Response to Bálint Békefi’s “Van Til versus Stroud: Is the Transcendental Argument for Christian Theism Viable?”

Stroud’s Objection Restated

Bálint Békefi proposes the following transcendental argument (Békefi, B. Van Til versus Stroud: “Is the Transcendental Argument for Christian Theism Viable?” TheoLogica. Published Online First: September 26, 2017):

(S1) If the negation of p is self-defeating, then p is true.
(S2) The negation of p is self-defeating.
(S3) Therefore, p is true.
(Békefi 9)…

Read more

We’ve got mail: Are the senses reliable?

I do not know if this is the right place to ask this question but regardless, I have a question regarding presuppositional apologetics and how the Christian knows what she/he knows. I have been studying apologetics (classic/PA) for a while and I feel as though I have come to somewhat of a roadblock in epistemology. So here’s my question. Does the Vantillian approach to apologetics rely on sensation and if so, how does it account for the reliability of sensation. Usually when I ask this question the answer is “God has made our senses reliable” but I am equally aware

Read more

Romans 6 and Prolepsis

If, as we are told by Date and Co., death spoken of a present tense is prolepsis – an event spoken of as certain to occur in the future – are we to take regeneration to be something that occurs only after this death? For what are we born again, as if we had a need? It’s not as if we are dead, is it? For, as we are told, death is something to be considered as the actual deprivation of life; and speaking of “dead in trespasses and sins” as if it was a present reality is prolepsis, is …

Read more

John Starke on Van Til’s Influence on Christian Thought

John Starke over at The Gospel Coalition takes a quick look at the affect Dr. Cornelius Van Til has had since his work at Westminster Theological Seminary.

John Starke notes:

Van Til transformed the discussions around epistemology and apologetics unlike anyone else in modern Christian history—being the main influence behind theologians, pastors, and apologists like John Frame, Tim Keller, David Powlison, Greg Bahnsen and the entire systematic and apologetics departments of Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia and California, headed by names like Michael Horton, Scott Oliphint, William Edgar, and David VanDrunen.

Even Dr. Albert Mohler of SBTS has spoken of …

Read more

Answering the Argument from Horrific Suffering 4

Argument from Horrific Suffering

The exchange has taken place as follows: The Argument from Horrific Suffering for the Non-Existence of God (Mitch) / Answering the Argument from Horrific Suffering (Chris) / Bolt and Horrific Suffering (Mitch) / Answering the Argument from Horrific Suffering 2 (Chris) / Bolt and Horrific Suffering II (Mitch) / Answering the Argument from Horrific Suffering 3 (Chris) / Bolt and Horrific Suffering III (Mitch) / …Answers the Argument from Horrific Suffering (ZaoThanatoo).

Mitch notes that I am still challenging premise (4) of the following argument:

Horrific Suffering (def.) = that most awe-full form of suffering that

Read more

This Sort of God

Christianity offers the triune God, the absolute personality, containing all of the attributes enumerated, as the God in whom we believe. This conception of God is the foundation of everything we hold dear. Unless we can believe in this sort of God, it does us no good to be told that we may believe in some other sort of God, or in anything else. For us everything depends for its meaning upon this sort of God. Accordingly, we are not interested to have anyone prove to us the existence of any other sort of God but this God. Any other

Read more


A friend pointed me toward this post by Brandon Adams. From what I can tell Brandon is influenced a good bit by Gordon H. Clark and argues in his post that Van Tillian presuppositionalism and specifically TAG is inconsistent with the WCF and LBC. While I am not one to excitedly engage in the Van Til versus Clark debate there are a few areas where I believe Brandon is simply mistaken about Van Til and Bahnsen’s method. One of the reasons I do not tend to engage in arguments against Clarkianism is that I am rather unfamiliar with the position. …

Read more

Apologetics and the Arminian

The purpose of this post is to address a response to the above presentation, wherein presuppositional apologetics seems to be misunderstood by the author. The author’s response can be found here, but I will address most of the post, if not all, in the following article.

James White recently argued for presuppositional apologetics and against evidential apologetics. (link) He starts out with an analysis of Colossians 1:16-18, and Colossians 2:2-9, which focus on the Lordship of Christ. James White points out that the gospel is a radical claim, which unbelievers reject.

If you watched the above video (or heard …

Read more