Bahnsen
Bahnsen
Bahnsen
Nick Norelli
Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth
New Jersey
On New Year's Eve of 2008 I set as a goal to have Van Til's Apologetic read and reviewed by the
end of February 2009. Well February came and went with no prospect of me being done with
this massive volume any time soon. It is only in the recent past that I've completed the book, and
now that I've taken the time to jot down some thoughts on it. I came to this work at a
disadvantage because I've not read Cornelius Van Til for myself so I’m unable to assess how
well Bahnsen actually represented and understood him. As I understand it there are other
presuppostionalists who disagree with Bahnsen at certain points (see e.g., John Frame’s
comment on the back cover) but having neither read them nor Van Til I can't be sure of which
points exactly or whether or not their alternative views are correct. That being said, I was able to
gain what I believe is a good understanding of Van Til's thought from Bahnsen in this volume.
That said, the progression of thought flowed well and made sense. Bahnsen opens with an intro
to Van Til’s apologetic which is followed by a chapter on the task of apologetics itself which is
then followed by a summary chapter that offers illustrations and examples of
presuppositionalism in practice. I especially appreciated Bahnsen’s remark that “[o]ne of the
compelling features of presuppositionalism is its accessibility and suitability to believers at all
levels of academic sophistication.” (88) Chapters 4-6 deal mainly with epistemology while
chapter 6 also lays the groundwork for the unbeliever’s stance against God and the Gospel. This
all segues nicely into chapter 7 which spells out in some detail the presuppositional apologetic
argument. Chapter 8 goes on to compare presuppositionalism to the “traditional” apologetic
methods while criticizing them for various reasons, among which are: they are non-Reformed,
assume the autonomy of man, believe in brute facts, etc. This all flows from Van Til’s equation
of theology, philosophy, and evangelism with apologetics. For Van Til one’s apologetic method
must match their theology and so when Reformed apologists engage in “traditional” apologetics
they do so in a manner that is counterintuitive to their theology. If I had to choose just one thing
that stands at the center or Reformed theology and Van Til’s apologetic then I’d be forced to say
the sovereignty of God, and it is mainly on this point that Van Til saw the apologetics of
Arminian, Catholic, and Lutheran believers as being deficient. Chapter 9 closes the book with a
helpful concluding summary on how to defend the faith.
This book has many wonderful features such as an introductory biography on Cornelius Van Til
(more books should have these!), an extensive and detailed analytical outline of the book's
contents, as well as a bibliography of Van Til's writings. Detailed Scripture, name, and subject
indices as well as footnotes throughout add to the overall appeal of this work. And it doesn't hurt
from a functional/aesthetical standpoint that this book has a durable hardcover, with an attractive
glossy dust jacket, and sewn binding (I'm assuming) that allows it to lay open no matter what
section you are turned to. However, I offer this caveat: this is a book by Reformed Christians for
Reformed Christians. The non-Reformed will certainly be able to learn from this work, as I
undoubtedly have, but they’ll find themselves unlikely to agree with much that is said because it
is based on Reformed theology. There are times when unnamed Arminians, Lutherans, or
‘Romanists’ are referenced concerning their beliefs when in point of fact they don’t believe such
things (e.g., p. 42 where the unnamed Arminian is said to believe in “degrees of deadness” while
what it later described as the Calvinist view of differences of knowledge more accurately
summarizes what Arminians believe). Nonetheless, this is a quality volume on all counts; I
highly recommend it to any/everyone interested in Christian apologetics.