• Cornelius Van Til,  Greg Bahnsen,  James Anderson,  Robert Stern,  Transcendental Arguments for the Existence of God

    Why We Can Argue Transcendentally

    January 21, 2016

    Transcendental arguments usually seek to demonstrate that human experience (or a particular part of human experience) has, as a necessary condition, the existence of or the belief in something. The form of the argument is simply that “there must be something Y if there is something X of which Y is a necessary condition”2 Robert Stern maintains that, strictly speaking, transcendental arguments are for a metaphysical precondition. He suggests that there are four common features in the metaphysical kind of transcendental argument. First, the claim is for a metaphysical condition usually arrived at a priori and obtains in every possible world. For example, says Stern, “existence is a condition for…

    Read More
  • Alvin Plantinga,  James Anderson,  John Frame

    Anderson on Frame, Van Til and Plantinga

    January 14, 2013

    In the canal of thought between epistemology and apologetics there exists a triad of thinkers who contribute, in different ways, to both disciplines. Yet few have articulated positive relationships between the thought of Cornelius Van Til, John Frame and Alvin Plantinga. Scott Oliphint, a Van Tillian, denounced Plantinga as beginning from an anti-Christian premise. Bahnsen, another Van Tillian, dismisses Frame for not being Van Tillian enough. Plantinga, for his own part, entirely ignores Van Til even though even though he presents very similar lines of argument. And then there are those, like my old prof, John Feinberg, who, though convinced of the success of Plantinga’s work, are nonetheless  opposed to Van Til’s and Frame’s apologetic method. One exception…

    Read More
  • Alvin Plantinga,  Cornelius Van Til,  Epistemology,  James Anderson,  Open Theism

    If Human Beings Know Anything God Must Know Everything

    October 29, 2012

    I have become fascinated by a single thought lately. I began thinking about it last year and have been trying to understand it ever since. The thought is something like this: In order for anyone to know anything, someone must know everything. Expressed more visually: if there is knowledge, there must be KNOWLEDGE. I found the idea in the writings of Cornelius Van Til who writes, “there must be comprehensive knowledge somewhere if there is to be any true knowledge anywhere.”1 The following, gleaned from something I wrote for a class during my MA, traces some of my thoughts on the matter, in particular, relating the idea to divine foreknowledge…

    Read More
  • Cornelius Van Til,  James Anderson,  Robert Stern,  Transcendental Arguments for the Existence of God

    Transcendental Arguments for the Existence of God

    October 13, 2012

    Just what is a transcendental argument? Well let me attempt to explain. Transcendental arguments usually seek to demonstrate that human experience (or a particular part of human experience) has, as a necessary condition, the existence of or the belief in something. The form of the argument is simply that “there must be something Y if there is something X of which Y is a necessary condition”2 Robert Stern maintains that, strictly speaking, transcendental arguments are for a metaphysical precondition. He suggests that there are four common features in the metaphysical kind of transcendental argument. First, the claim is for a metaphysical condition usually arrived at a priori and obtains in every possible world.…

    Read More
  • James Anderson,  Paradox,  Trinity

    A Defence of Belief in the Trinity

    October 9, 2012

    Many objections leveled at the Christian are related to whether or not particular Christian doctrines are coherent. One such doctrine is the doctrine of the Trinity. How can a Christian maintain her belief in a statement asserting that there is one divine being who is three divine beings at the same time? Formulations of the doctrine in creeds, doctrinal statements and systematic theologies attempt to smooth out apparent contradictions while remaining consistent with scripture. James Anderson argues that any treatment of the doctrine of the Trinity faces a dilemma – to remain orthodox and face paradox or to banish paradox and embrace the heterodox. Anderson concludes that “no writer from…

    Read More
  • Greg Welty,  James Anderson,  Logic

    An Elegant Argument

    February 12, 2012

    I have been following the work of James Anderson from Reformed Theological Seminary, partly because we share an interest in the writings of Cornelius Van Til. He and Greg Welty have composed a particularly elegant argument for the existence of God entitled “The Lord of Non-Contradiction.” The argument runs as follows: The laws of logic are necessary truths about truths; they are necessarily true propositions. Propositions are real entities, but cannot be physical entities; they are essentially thoughts. So the laws of logic are necessarily true thoughts. Since they are true in every possible world, they must exist in every possible world. But if there are necessarily existent thoughts, there must be a necessarily existent mind;…

    Read More