It is often said that Barth believed in a god who was “wholly other.” It’s an oft repeated phrase, but rarely understood. Van Til would say “absolutely other.” By that
In chapter 3 of Christian Apologetics Van Til addresses the issue of the “point of contact” (Anknüpfungspunkt). That is to say, the point at which the believer may make contact
Both Van Til and Barth rejected all forms of bare theism. That is, they denied a generic view of God. Both believed this “god” was an idol. This is the
Jim Cassidy and Camden Bucey discuss theological methodology in light of Calvin’s view of natural theology. As a starting point for the discussion, they turn to Thiago M. Silva’s article,
The Westminster Larger Catechism defines justifying faith as a saving grace, wrought in the heart of a sinner by the Spirit and Word of God, whereby he, being convinced of
Saving faith is the instrument by which the whole person is united to the whole Christ in the unbreakable bond of the Holy Spirit. I am not my own, confesses the believer,
Now we begin to make a definite turn toward Barth in Van Til’s writing. Thus far this blog series has been a smattering of topics arising from my rereading of
Van Til used the word “scholasticism” (or its other variations) as shorthand for Thomistic dualism (and with it the medieval synthesis of Christian and pagan thought). In short Thomistic dualism
This post is a kind of follow-on from a previous post about “as-suchness.” In The New Synthesis Van Til writes: Paul does not discuss questions of “fact” and views of
We took to Facebook to broadcast a live Q&A session. With questions submitted through email and the live comment thread, we covered Lord’s Day observance, fasting and gluttony, and membership
It is often said that Barth believed in a god who was “wholly other.” It’s an oft repeated phrase, but rarely understood. Van Til would say “absolutely other.” By that
In chapter 3 of Christian Apologetics Van Til addresses the issue of the “point of contact” (Anknüpfungspunkt). That is to say, the point at which the believer may make contact
Both Van Til and Barth rejected all forms of bare theism. That is, they denied a generic view of God. Both believed this “god” was an idol. This is the
Jim Cassidy and Camden Bucey discuss theological methodology in light of Calvin’s view of natural theology. As a starting point for the discussion, they turn to Thiago M. Silva’s article,
The Westminster Larger Catechism defines justifying faith as a saving grace, wrought in the heart of a sinner by the Spirit and Word of God, whereby he, being convinced of
Saving faith is the instrument by which the whole person is united to the whole Christ in the unbreakable bond of the Holy Spirit. I am not my own, confesses the believer,
Now we begin to make a definite turn toward Barth in Van Til’s writing. Thus far this blog series has been a smattering of topics arising from my rereading of
Van Til used the word “scholasticism” (or its other variations) as shorthand for Thomistic dualism (and with it the medieval synthesis of Christian and pagan thought). In short Thomistic dualism
This post is a kind of follow-on from a previous post about “as-suchness.” In The New Synthesis Van Til writes: Paul does not discuss questions of “fact” and views of
We took to Facebook to broadcast a live Q&A session. With questions submitted through email and the live comment thread, we covered Lord’s Day observance, fasting and gluttony, and membership
Receive notifications about forthcoming events, publications, and other updates. If you provide a US mailing address, we’ll send you a complimentary copy of our print newsletter when we publish the next issue.
Christmas wonderfully brings into focus the first advent of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ into the world. Long ago, in the little town of Bethlehem of Judea, the eternal
Having appreciated the work of Richard Muller, and his students, and having benefited immensely from their writings, I am still far from an expert in the area of Reformed scholasticism.
During our symposium, “Crossroads of Conviction,” D. G. Hart had a spirited exchange with Timon Cline regarding establishmentarianism. With respect to the American founding, Dr. Hart made a comment regarding
Geerhardus Vos mounted a heavenly vantage point from which he surveyed the world and all its happenings. From the high tower of God’s Word, he saw with eagle-eye clarity the
Receive the latest news and information from us delivered to your email inbox. If you provide a U.S. mailing address when you signup, we’ll send you complimentary copies of our print magazine as they are published.
