I love Van Til. Repeatedly listening to his messages on the history of Western Philosophy changed my life. We do not put the Judge of the universe on trial. We begin by humbly believing Him.
@@nickjones6651 Some people certainly make others around them sick. Why would you say that? Why are you even here? You didn't even listen to the video.
Errr in what way was it awesome? I thought it was rather PITIFUL! Isnt this the end of christianity? When all you've got is resorting to childish word games because you can't provide EVEN the tinniest scrap of credible evidence of your God isnt the only thing you've got left the indoctrination (abuse) of innocent children?
@@nickjones6651 The only reason you are here is that you know God and yet deny him. Videos like this annoy you because you know you know and cannot escape.
@@billhesford6098 @Bill Hesford REALLY? Is that true or are you a dishonest morally bankrupt charlatan? Please present CREDIBLE EVIDENCE that i know your god EXISTS? Please show me this god that im denying?
@@nickjones6651 Well, you show me logic exists and I will show you God. If you deny logic exists - are you using logic to do so? I will not be able to see your logic, but reading your reply suggests you think it actually exists. Personally, I don't think either can be proved in a way you would accept, but we both know, both exist.
@@billhesford6098 Why on EARTH would i need to do that bill? Logic is a mental tool that humans use. If you want to deny it, thats your prerogative. So.....you made a claim that your god did it and not only cant you support your OWN CHILDISH CLAIMS, you cant even show your god EXISTS can you!!!
The resolution of apparent antithetical postulates requires an understanding, on the part of the receiver, to transcend the complexities of terms used.
@@nickjones6651 We all know when one makes a personal attack, they have no argument. Or else you would use that argument. Now that would be low, pitiful.
Both inductive and deductive processes ultimately fail due to the inherent limitation of their source - human intellect. Ask God how to think in a way which honors His wisdom.
Intelligence is the assessment of relative ability to juggle systems of observable fact. Human awareness of the presence of wisdom results from the supernaturally provided guidance to act in ways which support God’s good outcomes regardless of human systematized identification of fact.
The concept of pre-supposition is itself derived from human intellect and is, therefore, subject to ultimate failure as regards potential to resolve shortcomings of human thought. Mankind must receive God’s mind through His Spirit and so bring His understanding to mankind. Mankind will never jump the hurdle which impedes his attempts to reach God.
I'm reading the dutch reformed theologian Gisbertus Voetius at the moment. He basically says the same. The key in understanding those concepts is the notion that fallen men never have the abilty to reason correctly without the grace of God. Fallen men sees nature and uses reason, but he is not able to grasp the whole meaning of it. For the christian however, every kind of knowledge has to do with God himseld AND has a soteriological context. Thus, only he can have a full grasp about the ectypal knowledge. The nonchristian however uses reason (only because God granted that to him). But he doesn't see the truth as a self-revelation of God. Neither is he aware that the knowledge contains facts about salvation. Thus, if he uses his blurred reasoning to say something about God, the God he 'creates' is always a God of his own imagination. God is being humanized, because the unbeliever takes his distorted univocal core-term and apply it to God Himself. Because of that, only the born-again christian is able through the Holy Spirit to see the whole ectypical knowledge as God meant it.
@@ezbody In a world of endless chaos and random meaninglessness how is your statement even comprehensible? It is, but it shouldn't be if what you say is correct.
I appreciate this. Thanks.....50:00ffff, the precondition, the underlying presupposition of the negation has to be some foundation which there is meaning in the words themselves......... Ie, When some idiot denies God, by saying religion is worthless for there is no God, then he has contradicted himself by the presupposition that God exists to be denied.
Educational philosophies are based on the love of human thought rather than on the Love of Knowing God (theology). The result of such training is to support confidence in self. The result of listening (knowing) God is to strengthen dependence upon Him. It is not surprising that camps of human systems of thought produce segregation and not unity. Only the viewing of the one God by all can produce unity of truth and the fruit produced due the enactment of His wisdom.
Van til and Bahnsen must have been insufferable people to be around. Imagine someone who creates an approach that insists they can't be wrong, and any criticism is evidence they're right. Truly fragile people.
Ma Reine... je vous donne l'arme de l'ennemi. Il peut prendre leurs chefs ou leurs crocs... quoi qu'il en soit, aucun ennemi ne pourra tenir devant vous ou votre amour.
Rather than assuming the educational background of the potential listener, state simply the truth as Jesus did. Regardless of the layers of educational sophistication (usage intentional) meaning resides there in. The trip a listener must take to comprehend is impaired by an insulation of unnecessary obfuscation (called higher learning). Do no become repellant of learning but do not let it weight you down. And do not let it impair your ability to communicate - at any level.
What would Cornelius Van Til want the unbeliever to do when confronted by the Trinitarian Arminian gospel? Listen, because surely the true gospel is in there somewhere? Or turn away, because unbelievers have no protection from heresy? If God is what presuppers think, God would no more allow Christians to err on divine sovereignty and human freewill, than God would allow them to err on Jesus' deity.
The “unknown” (un-named) God is the only true one. Mankind’s knowledge of God based on one’s understanding being relevant to another human is invalidated by that very comparison.
God is is-ness. He need not explain it. We are given witness of it. We are created and reside currently within a creation which represents God. We are called to also represent Him. We have the option not to heed that call. The consequence is plain - even when we deny the evidence before us. The option to be brought along into the new creation or to be left behind to experience the result of the current one - once re-created.
This illustrates the meaning of foolishness. Attempts to disprove God are void, at their basis, of rational thought but spun within a false context of rational argument. These attempts are the result of systems of self-delusion promote, primarily, in academia. The assumptive goal is that if you are sufficiently educated you will be able to convince yourself there is no God. Some have reached this supposedly lofty goal. The believer should pray for them to see the dead end to which they are accelerating.
Atheism cannot be lived out honestly and consistently. And neither can Calvinism. Scott Oliphint needs to ditch Calvinism. He is inconsistent in his thinking because he holds to Calvinism which is flawed scripturally, morally, and intellectually.
TheMirabillis Atheism or non belief in the claims of the posed gods is the default position till the one making the claim meets their burden of proof. You are technically atheistic, "non belief" to every other claim of posed gods.
Now I just need a video titled Understanding Scott Oliphint.
🤣
@@manager0175 your opinion is noted. Have a great day.
😂😂😂 I hear you brother. He can be tough at times but believe it or not this is one of the most clear he has been.
I love Van Til. Repeatedly listening to his messages on the history of Western Philosophy changed my life. We do not put the Judge of the universe on trial. We begin by humbly believing Him.
I enjoyed this.
Pleasure to be introduced to Oliphant. Thanks for the content!
Wow! Amazing break down of Van Til's philosophical perspectives. He did a great job with his commentary notes in Defending The Faith.
Thank you for sharing this lecture. Very helpful.
What sweet experience to walk with Dr. Van Til every day and to hear him talk!
Wouldn't that make any decent person vomit or laugh themselves to death?
@@nickjones6651 Some people certainly make others around them sick. Why would you say that? Why are you even here? You didn't even listen to the video.
What a great lecture! Summed up Hegel and Kant in one sentence. Great work Scott.
This Was Awesome!!! A must watch for all.
Errr in what way was it awesome? I thought it was rather PITIFUL!
Isnt this the end of christianity? When all you've got is resorting to childish word games because you can't provide EVEN the tinniest scrap of credible evidence of your God isnt the only thing you've got left the indoctrination (abuse) of innocent children?
@@nickjones6651 The only reason you are here is that you know God and yet deny him. Videos like this annoy you because you know you know and cannot escape.
@@billhesford6098 @Bill Hesford REALLY? Is that true or are you a dishonest morally bankrupt charlatan?
Please present CREDIBLE EVIDENCE that i know your god EXISTS?
Please show me this god that im denying?
@@nickjones6651 Well, you show me logic exists and I will show you God. If you deny logic exists - are you using logic to do so?
I will not be able to see your logic, but reading your reply suggests you think it actually exists. Personally, I don't think either can be proved in a way you would accept, but we both know, both exist.
@@billhesford6098 Why on EARTH would i need to do that bill? Logic is a mental tool that humans use. If you want to deny it, thats your prerogative.
So.....you made a claim that your god did it and not only cant you support your OWN CHILDISH CLAIMS, you cant even show your god EXISTS can you!!!
THANK U FOR SAYING EVIDENCE AND PRESUP GO TOGETHER
Very Powerful!!!
The resolution of apparent antithetical postulates requires an understanding, on the part of the receiver, to transcend the complexities of terms used.
Bahnsen said that Presuppositionalism is the ultimate evidentialism.
What type of thinking serves God’s goodness regardless of human devised cultures?
Van Til is tough for me. But, I love it. Seems to hit the nail on the head.
I thought it was laughable!
Van til is an utter joke.
Quite sad that Christianity has got this dishonest, PITIFUL and.....low!
@@nickjones6651 We all know when one makes a personal attack, they have no argument. Or else you would use that argument. Now that would be low, pitiful.
@nickjones6651 he's not even taken seriously in philosophy.
Another personal attack. He is better than I thought.@@LuciferAlmighty
@billhesford6098 presup is a joke just like bottom barrel van til
I love the quality of your video camera! Which camera did you use?
I’m going to guess a Fuji x sensor, based on the colors and skin tone.
Both inductive and deductive processes ultimately fail due to the inherent limitation of their source - human intellect. Ask God how to think in a way which honors His wisdom.
Intelligence is the assessment of relative ability to juggle systems of observable fact. Human awareness of the presence of wisdom results from the supernaturally provided guidance to act in ways which support God’s good outcomes regardless of human systematized identification of fact.
William lane craig could really learn something from this. And i say that with love.
He would have to reject molinism and adopt reformed theology in order to embrace Van Til's perspective on apologetics.
@Bigtombowski Dr White has addressed that issue many times. www.aomin.org
They can also learn something from Craig :)
@@Degasbm Lol what could anybody ever learn from little willy craig?
Rather than debating on the other’s level, carefully select terms which cannot be refuted - regardless of educational background.
any books by Van Til you can recommend for me to read ?
The concept of pre-supposition is itself derived from human intellect and is, therefore, subject to ultimate failure as regards potential to resolve shortcomings of human thought. Mankind must receive God’s mind through His Spirit and so bring His understanding to mankind. Mankind will never jump the hurdle which impedes his attempts to reach God.
What cameras did you use?
Therefore, the writer(speaker) must bring the meaning to them listener (reader).
I'm reading the dutch reformed theologian Gisbertus Voetius at the moment. He basically says the same. The key in understanding those concepts is the notion that fallen men never have the abilty to reason correctly without the grace of God. Fallen men sees nature and uses reason, but he is not able to grasp the whole meaning of it. For the christian however, every kind of knowledge has to do with God himseld AND has a soteriological context. Thus, only he can have a full grasp about the ectypal knowledge. The nonchristian however uses reason (only because God granted that to him). But he doesn't see the truth as a self-revelation of God. Neither is he aware that the knowledge contains facts about salvation. Thus, if he uses his blurred reasoning to say something about God, the God he 'creates' is always a God of his own imagination. God is being humanized, because the unbeliever takes his distorted univocal core-term and apply it to God Himself. Because of that, only the born-again christian is able through the Holy Spirit to see the whole ectypical knowledge as God meant it.
Dutch Theologians are such a gift. God blessed the Dutch lol
Presup Apologetics is creating a God of their own imagination, as well. It's a narcissistic God, just like its apologists are -- narcissistic.
@@ezbody Wow, what an argument!
@@ezbody In a world of endless chaos and random meaninglessness how is your statement even comprehensible? It is, but it shouldn't be if what you say is correct.
Perfectly said. (And, just when i was about to explode at this new batch of anti-reformed youtubers!)...
I appreciate this. Thanks.....50:00ffff, the precondition, the underlying presupposition of the negation has to be some foundation which there is meaning in the words themselves......... Ie, When some idiot denies God, by saying religion is worthless for there is no God, then he has contradicted himself by the presupposition that God exists to be denied.
Educational philosophies are based on the love of human thought rather than on the Love of Knowing God (theology). The result of such training is to support confidence in self. The result of listening (knowing) God is to strengthen dependence upon Him. It is not surprising that camps of human systems of thought produce segregation and not unity. Only the viewing of the one God by all can produce unity of truth and the fruit produced due the enactment of His wisdom.
Van til and Bahnsen must have been insufferable people to be around. Imagine someone who creates an approach that insists they can't be wrong, and any criticism is evidence they're right. Truly fragile people.
Non-existence is not provable. Existence is evident. Denial of that to which evidence points is the closest any get to disproving what is evident.
Ma Reine... je vous donne l'arme de l'ennemi. Il peut prendre leurs chefs ou leurs crocs... quoi qu'il en soit, aucun ennemi ne pourra tenir devant vous ou votre amour.
I am sure this can be taught much better. Teach this to a grade 5 teacher and ask her to teach this and people will understand it.
Anyone with education above grade 5 will laugh at this!
Rather than assuming the educational background of the potential listener, state simply the truth as Jesus did. Regardless of the layers of educational sophistication (usage intentional) meaning resides there in. The trip a listener must take to comprehend is impaired by an insulation of unnecessary obfuscation (called higher learning). Do no become repellant of learning but do not let it weight you down. And do not let it impair your ability to communicate - at any level.
What would Cornelius Van Til want the unbeliever to do when confronted by the Trinitarian Arminian gospel? Listen, because surely the true gospel is in there somewhere? Or turn away, because unbelievers have no protection from heresy? If God is what presuppers think, God would no more allow Christians to err on divine sovereignty and human freewill, than God would allow them to err on Jesus' deity.
This is why DECENT people laugh at Christians!
The “unknown” (un-named) God is the only true one. Mankind’s knowledge of God based on one’s understanding being relevant to another human is invalidated by that very comparison.
God is is-ness. He need not explain it. We are given witness of it. We are created and reside currently within a creation which represents God. We are called to also represent Him. We have the option not to heed that call. The consequence is plain - even when we deny the evidence before us. The option to be brought along into the new creation or to be left behind to experience the result of the current one - once re-created.
This illustrates the meaning of foolishness. Attempts to disprove God are void, at their basis, of rational thought but spun within a false context of rational argument. These attempts are the result of systems of self-delusion promote, primarily, in academia. The assumptive goal is that if you are sufficiently educated you will be able to convince yourself there is no God. Some have reached this supposedly lofty goal. The believer should pray for them to see the dead end to which they are accelerating.
If only these conversations weren’t poo-poo’ed….
Atheism cannot be lived out honestly and consistently. And neither can Calvinism.
Scott Oliphint needs to ditch Calvinism.
He is inconsistent in his thinking because he holds to Calvinism which is flawed scripturally, morally, and intellectually.
Nope!
TheMirabillis
Atheism or non belief in the claims of the posed gods is the default position till the one making the claim meets their burden of proof. You are technically atheistic, "non belief" to every other claim of posed gods.
Actually his philosophical framework won't work with anything other than Calvinism.
Themirabillis - Do you have an actual argument for that belief of yours? Or in your world, does mere proclamation satisfy?
@@TomAnderson_81 Does absolute truth exist?