I have been teaching apologetics for more than 35 years. All that teaching has been from a generally “presuppositional” perspective. That perspective owes its modern origin and articulation in many respects to Cornelius Van Til. Van Til was, of course, part of the classic faculty of Westminster Theological Seminary. With J. Gresham Machen, John Murray, and other famous faculty members, he stood for conservative Reformed Christianity when it seemed the whole world was apostatizing from it.
Van Til, however, did not believe that his views were novel or without precedent in church history. Nor do I. That is why my approach builds on a historical survey that gives an overview of the development of apologetic views in the history of the church. This is important today because it is noised far and wide that Classical Apologetics, as articulated by Thomas Aquinas, is the historic view and that Presuppositionalism is novel.
This is simply wrong. The fact is that two views of apologetics have been developing in the history of the church. The fact is that, on a matter so basic as whether men have an implanted knowledge of God, Thomas differed significantly from both Augustine and Anselm. The fact is that this difference of perspective became evident in the early 20th century when Warfield expressed astonishment at Kuyper’s apologetic views.
Furthermore, in these lectures, I will argue that Calvin, in many respects, both anticipated Van Til and disagreed with Thomas. His views dominated the confessional tradition which grew out of the Reformation. The issue is not if Calvin utilized a scholastic methodology characteristic of Thomas and Medieval Theologians. He probably did. The issue is whether he adopted key parts of the scholastic theology, including its classical apologetics. I will argue that he did not.
After surveying the history of apologetics, I attempt to show that Van Til has accurately understood Scripture and Classical Apologetics has not. The advocates of Classical Apologetics drastically misunderstand Van Til and Presuppositionalism. I have seen sad examples of this. It is only because of this misunderstanding that they can refute the straw man, which they think is Van Til and Presuppositionalism.
Do you greet these assertions with a little surprise or even shock? All I can ask is for you to consider my lectures and see if they do not present a faithful presentation of church history and Scripture, which leads to Presuppositionalism. I hope you do. I think this matters for our approach to evangelism and even the science of theology.
Dr. Sam Waldron is the Academic Dean of CBTS and professor of Systematic Theology. He is also one of the pastors of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Owensboro, KY. Dr. Waldron received a B.A. from Cornerstone University, an M.Div. from Trinity Ministerial Academy, a Th.M. from Grand Rapids Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. From 1977 to 2001 he was a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids, MI. Dr. Waldron is the author of numerous books including A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, The End Times Made Simple, Baptist Roots in America, To Be Continued?, and MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response.
