Part of a good transcendental critique must be drawing the lines between the dots for people to see clearly. If I have any critique of Van Til, it is that
In The New Modernism Van Til identifies the Theology of Crisis with “dialectical theology.” But what is dialectical theology? Van Til explains that dialectical theology is “at bottom activistic and
At long last we have come to the end of the beginning (see parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). We have reviewed Van Til’s opening salvo against Barth’s theology as it
Van Til now turns to Barth’s doctrine of creation. Barth denies that creation as it came forth from the hand of God was good, and was to have a genuine
As we continue to unpack Van Til’s review of Zerbe’s book we come to the second part of the review, which concerns Barth’s epistemology. Van Til opens with an absurd
When I first heard about Barth’s concept of the “wholly other” God, it sounded perfectly orthodox. Barth’s emphasis on the qualitative difference between God and man struck me as nothing
In the last post we began to consider Van Til’s first published criticism of Barth. It was set in the context of a book review.[1] There we underscored Van Til’s
God’s sovereignty and man’s freedom are often thought to be in competition with one another in a sort of zero-sum game: either God is sovereign or I am free. This has
It is often assumed that The New Modernism (1946) is Van Til’s first published writing in which he evaluates Barth’s thought. Actually Van Til first published about Barth in a
For Van Til no form of unbelief escapes the charge of rationalism. Irrationalism is only a disguised form of rationalism. But before getting to that, it might help to explain
Part of a good transcendental critique must be drawing the lines between the dots for people to see clearly. If I have any critique of Van Til, it is that
In The New Modernism Van Til identifies the Theology of Crisis with “dialectical theology.” But what is dialectical theology? Van Til explains that dialectical theology is “at bottom activistic and
At long last we have come to the end of the beginning (see parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). We have reviewed Van Til’s opening salvo against Barth’s theology as it
Van Til now turns to Barth’s doctrine of creation. Barth denies that creation as it came forth from the hand of God was good, and was to have a genuine
As we continue to unpack Van Til’s review of Zerbe’s book we come to the second part of the review, which concerns Barth’s epistemology. Van Til opens with an absurd
When I first heard about Barth’s concept of the “wholly other” God, it sounded perfectly orthodox. Barth’s emphasis on the qualitative difference between God and man struck me as nothing
In the last post we began to consider Van Til’s first published criticism of Barth. It was set in the context of a book review.[1] There we underscored Van Til’s
God’s sovereignty and man’s freedom are often thought to be in competition with one another in a sort of zero-sum game: either God is sovereign or I am free. This has
It is often assumed that The New Modernism (1946) is Van Til’s first published writing in which he evaluates Barth’s thought. Actually Van Til first published about Barth in a
For Van Til no form of unbelief escapes the charge of rationalism. Irrationalism is only a disguised form of rationalism. But before getting to that, it might help to explain
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.
