\nIt appears that Van Til's presuppositionalism is due to the fact that he is evangelical while the later Westminster Theological Seminary's intent to transform that apologetics into "covenantal" apologetics, I believe, is due to the fact that the WTS (namely William Edgar, Scott Oliphint) is becoming less evangelical.\n<\/p>\n
\nThey rightly point out that presuppositionalism is one, unlike other apologetics (classical, evidential), that doesn't start the discussion from a neutral ground (outside the scope of scripture) with unbelievers. But in covenantal apologetics, one is more inclined to treat his subjects as believers already...thus here is the problem of the evangelism. From here spun the problem of many traditional orthodox churches of the West...risking the worship of moralism, etc. because the Lordship of Christ is not communicated without repentance - since the unbelievers are taken to be believers already (since christianity is true to begin with). It skipped the process of conversion and freedom from death...the principle on the part about "which sinners of the two would love God more" is washed out.\n<\/p>\n
\nNo, I'm not trying to promote the wild ecstatic conversion the modern day evangelicals and charismatics are pursuing. Nor do I wish to abolish convenantal apologetics. I'm merely stating that in evangelicalism, presuppositional apologetics is irreplaceable by covenantal apologetics since the latter actually requires the former to stand in the beginning.\n<\/p>\n
\nConvenantal apologetics could even be evidential or rational apologetics in disguise.\n<\/p>\n
\nThough I can see why they would be inclined to reject the use of the word "pressuposition". It is because of one simple misunderstanding. Pressuposition is not equal to assumption. It is the highest accepted premise. The chinese could translate it better: 先設 非 假設.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
It appears that Van Til's presuppositionalism is due to the fact that he is evangelical while the later Westminster Theological Seminary's intent to transform that apologetics into "covenantal" apologetics, I believe, is due to the fact that the WTS (namely … Continue reading