Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary

Liberty University

PRESUPPOSITIONAL APOLOGETICS – A SUMMARY AND CRITIQUE

Submitted to Dr. Rich A. Holland

in partial completion of course requirements for

APOL 500 – Introduction to Apologetics

Elke Speliopoulos (Student ID 22542317)

Downingtown, PA

November 14, 2010

 CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1

CORNELIUS VAN TIL..................................................................................................................2

OTHER PROPONENTS OF PRESUPPOSITIONALISM.............................................................2

GORDON H. CLARK.................................................................................................................2

JOHN FRAME............................................................................................................................3

GREG BAHNSEN.......................................................................................................................3

BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................................5
 1

INTRODUCTION

Grudem defines apologetics as the “discipline that seeks to provide a defense of the

truthfulness of the Christian faith for the purpose of convincing unbelievers.”0 Presuppositional

apologetics, also known as presuppositionalism, is considered one of the five traditional

apologetic approaches to apologetics, the other four being classical, historical, experiential and

evidential apologetics.0 This paper will argue that presuppositional apologetics is fraught with

difficulty to a non-Reformed believer who will invariably clash with the inherent belief of

presuppositional apologetics that only the elect can understand the truth of God through the

revelation of Scripture.

As described above, different branches of apologetics have developed from the basis of

both belief systems and personal preferences. All of them seek to do what Peter describes in 1

Peter 3:15 as “in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a

defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you”.0 Presuppositionalism

grew largely out of the Reformed view regarding election. Cornelius Van Til and a group of

other theologians argued that a person can only become aware of God’s truth when their eyes

are open to the truth of the Gospel. In Reformed thinking, this can only happen if a person is one

of the elect. According to presuppositional apologetics, all others, i.e. the non-regenerate and

non-elect are blinded to the truth of the Scriptures, and no amount of evidence can convince

them differently.

0
. Wayne A. Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, Mich.:
Inter-Varsity Press; Zondervan Pub. House, 1994), 1235.
0
. Ed Hinson and Ergun Caner, eds., The Popular Encyclopedia of Apologetics (Eugene, OR: Harvest
House Publishers, 2008), 64-66.
0
. The Holy Bible: English Standard Version, (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2001), 1 Pe 3:15.
 2

CORNELIUS VAN TIL

Cornelius Van Til, a Dutch born theologian who studied at Calvin College and Seminary

and Princeton Theological Seminary, taught for many years at Westminster Seminary and died in

1987, is considered a key defender of the presuppositional apologetics approach. Van Til, unlike

his evidentialist peers, believed that faith could not be defended based on argued and agreed-

upon facts, but rather that faith had to be “grounded in the self-attesting revelation of the triune

God.” 0 According to Van Til, non-believers should be challenged on their faulty or non-

complete presuppositions.

As Vanhoozer et al. describe Van Til’s work, his model of apologetics “inclined him

toward theological interpretations of Scripture that emphasized the sovereignty and authority of

God, the authority and sufficiency of Scripture, the ontological Trinity, the fullness of wisdom in

Christ, and the foolishness of unbelief.”0

OTHER PROPONENTS OF PRESUPPOSITIONALISM

GORDON H. CLARK

While Gordon H. Clark argued from a presuppositional perspective like Van Til, he took

a different course than Van Til and had a very public and contentious debate with Van Til in the

1940s regarding the limits or extent of human understanding and knowledge. Clark argued that

man had “more commonality with God at certain points.”0

0
. Evans, Pocket Dictionary of Apologetics & Philosophy of Religion, 120.
0
. Kevin J. Vanhoozer et al., Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI.:
SPCK; Baker Academic, 2005), 58.
0
. William Edgar, "Two Christian Warriors: Cornelius Van Til, and Francis A. Schaeffer Compared", in
Westminster Theological Journal Volume 57, 1 (Philadelphia: Westminster Theological Seminary, 1995), 62.
 3

JOHN FRAME

Netland explains that a presupposition “a basic commitment of the heart.”0 John Frame, a

student of Van Til, argued that every person has such presuppositions and that it is not a matter

of whether or not a person is governed by these presuppositions, but rather whether he or she is

willing to accept the presupposition that the self-revelation of God is contained in Scripture, the

only legitimate presupposition Frame would allow.0

GREG BAHNSEN

Greg Bahnsen, another disciple of Van Til wrote that “Van Til’s approach to the question

of God’s existence offers, I believe, the strongest form of proof and rational demonstration.”0

Bahnsen argued in an article on the concept of self-deception that non-believers believe false

propositions, but that such false belief nevertheless brought with it a non-paradoxical assertion

“that unbelievers culpably deceive themselves about their Maker.”0

CRITIQUE OF PRESUPPOSITIONAL APOLOGETICS

It is clear that the presuppositional apologetics of Van Til and others has merit in its

appeal to the sovereignty of God, which no one would argue with, regardless of (evangelical)

theological persuasion. Yet the topic of election plays such a large part in the understanding of

presuppositional apologetics that the accusation of too close a link to fideism has been brought

by those who do not share this approach to apologetics. Spencer writes,

0
. Harold A. Netland, “Apologetics, Worldviews, and the Problem of Neutral Criteria”, Trinity Journal Vol.
12, 1, (Winona Lake, IL: Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1991), 45.
0
. Ibid., 46.
0
. Greg L. Bahnsen, “The Crucial Concept of Self-Deception in Presuppositional Apologetics”,
Westminster Theological Journal Volume 57, 1 (Philadelphia: Westminster Theological Seminary, 1995), 2.
0
. Ibid., 32.
 4

More recently, Sproul, Gerstner, and Lindsley have argued that—protestations to the
contrary not withstanding—Van Til’s apologetic has no place (or at least no warranted
place) for reasoning with or giving evidence to unbelievers. In their judgment, fideism is
the inevitable result of Van Til’s presuppositionalism.0

From the perspective of ease of sharing with a non-believer, this approach would

certainly not generate an enthusiastic response among those who seek to evangelize, as there is

no “God litmus test” of whether or not a person is among the elect. It would seem to curb the

appetite for engaging in active evangelism if one can never know whether the person being

addressed is among those who start from the presupposition of the truth of God’s Word.

CONCLUSION

Presuppositional apologetics proposes that the only possible knowledge of God has to

come from a required presupposition of acceptance of God’s truth expressed in Scripture. While

several proponents of this apologetics method have developed slightly divergent interpretations,

the basic assumption precludes its broad adoption by believers who subscribe to a belief of

God’s revelation in nature and of man’s intense longing for a relationship with a higher Power,

even if he cannot pinpoint this source without further explanation. It also seems to forget

Ecclesiastes 3:11, which tells us that “He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also, he has

put eternity into man’s heart.”0

For further reading, one resource that can add to the reader’s understanding of this and

other methods of apologetics is the Christian Apologetics Journal, which is a publication of

Southern Evangelical Seminary.

0
. Stephen R. Spencer, “Fideism and Presuppositionalism,” Grace Theological Journal Volume 8 (1987,
2002): 89.
0
. The Holy Bible: English Standard Version, (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2001), 15.
 5

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bahnsen, Greg L. “The Crucial Concept of Self-Deception in Presuppositional Apologetics”.

Westminster Theological Journal Volume 57. 1. Philadelphia: Westminster Theological
Seminary, 1995.

Edgar, William, "Two Christian Warriors: Cornelius Van Til, and Francis A. Schaeffer
Compared". Westminster Theological Journal Volume 57. 1. Philadelphia: Westminster
Theological Seminary, 1995.

Evans, C. Stephen. Pocket Dictionary of Apologetics & Philosophy of Religion. Downers Grove,
Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2002.

Grudem, Wayne A. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Grand Rapids,

Mich.: Inter-Varsity Press; Zondervan Pub. House, 1994.

Hinson, Ed, and Ergun Caner, eds. The Popular Encyclopedia of Apologetics. Eugene, OR:
Harvest House Publishers, 2008.

The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2001.

Netland, Harold A. “Apologetics, Worldviews, and the Problem of Neutral Criteria”. Trinity
Journal Vol. 12, 1. Winona Lake, IL: Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1991.

Spencer, Stephen R. “Fideism and Presuppositionalism.” Grace Theological Journal Volume 8

(1987, 2002).

Vanhoozer, Kevin J., Craig G. Bartholomew, Daniel J. Treier, and N. T. Wright. Dictionary for
Theological Interpretation of the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI.: SPCK; Baker Academic,
2005.

Westminster Theological Journal Volume 57. 1. Philadelphia: Westminster Theological

Seminary, 1995.