
The Essential Van Til — More on Old Princeton
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

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

There is still a great deal of confusion out there concerning the difference between orthodox Reformed theology and the theology of Karl Barth. Are they not the same? Is Barth

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

There is still a great deal of confusion out there concerning the difference between orthodox Reformed theology and the theology of Karl Barth. Are they not the same? Is Barth
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.





Introduction Richard Burnett’s Machen’s Hope: The Transformation of a Modernist in the New Princeton represents an ambitious effort to offer a fresh perspective on a significant Presbyterian figure—one who is

In 1864, Folliott S. Pierpoint (1835–1917) published his hymn “The Sacrifice of Praise” for the celebration of the Lord’s Supper or eucharist (from the Greek eucharistia for “thanksgiving”). It would

Miracle of Spring A strange thing has taken placeA labor overnight—That by the thousands apaceNew births brought forth to light.Till now my yard was winter,The wind turns south, I wingBack

Summer By Geerhardus Vos Translated by Daniel Ragusa Though thousands of signs do brimThat he the land has graced,How shall I ever find him?Where do his footsteps haste?What tidings, O