Skip to main content

Gary Spencer & Cornelius Van Til: A Tribute to Two Men Who Shaped My Worldview

My father was never a wealthy man, monetarily speaking, but among the few valuable physical possessions he left were his books.  Back in the Spring I decided to read Van Til's Apologetic by Greg Bahnsen after discussing it with a friend.  I went on Amazon to buy a copy, but, after seeing the price, I remembered that my father had a copy, so I claimed it and dug in.  I'm glad I did.






Reading this book, this copy of this book, was one of the most surreal experiences of my life, primarily for two reasons.  Firstly, my father conveniently marked in this book (see pics below) with various colors of highlighters, which allowed me to underline in black pen without disrupting his markings.  I typically prefer to buy fresh, unmarked copies of books so that I can mark them up myself, but there was definitely something cool about reading and marking up a copy of a book that my father had so heavily marked himself.  It was as if I were following a path trodden by my father decades before.  I find it difficult to express just how it felt.  To put it simply, it was pretty special.  









Secondly, I was utterly amazed to see how thoroughly the contents of this book had shaped my worldview.  I wanted to read this book because, while I grew up hearing Van Til's name and ideas, I had never actually read a lick of Van Til himself.  This particular book offered extensive readings from his works, organized and analyzed as a helpful introduction.  What I found is that the core ideas drawn from across Van Til's literary corpus were precisely the concepts that shaped the worldview my father sought to impart to his children.  Despite having never read any of his writings, I found myself familiar with most of the ideas, and even much of the language, of Van Til.  It was like that unshakeable feeling when you arrive to a place you know you've never been, but can't help but to feel that you recognize.

Cornelius Van Til was not perfect, to be sure, but he did offer several emphases that I believe are important for the Christian Church in the 21st Century.  We would do well to heed his insistence that all facts are God's facts and that Christianity provides the only coherent foundation for reason.  Social media would seem to provide proof positive that Van Til was correct when he said that all men wear glasses that color how we see the world, that is, that we all approach debate with presuppositions that determine how we interpret the facts.  Perhaps his most important emphasis was that there is no neutrality--all men are covenant breakers or covenant keepers--and that honoring God with our minds requires us to acknowledge Him (His existence, His plan, and His Word) at the outset of every intellectual endeavor.  These are the principles that motivated my father as a Christian educator for 40+ years and that he sought to impart to his students, parishioners, and children.

Over the Fourth of July Weekend five of us siblings waded through Dad's books.  We all found something worth keeping and most of us left with multiple handfuls.  My brother and I split the Van Til works, so, having read Bahnsen's analysis of Van Til, I now feel prepared to read the man himself.

Comments

  1. I have the fondest memories of your dad. He led my examination, was fair, balanced, and as tough as nails, and in the end, gracious.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That was me, Jim DuJack

      Delete
    2. I appreciate you sharing. He definitely was hard-nosed, but what he really wanted to see was a pastoral heart and love for the truth.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons I Affirm Paedocommunion

If you have interacted with me on social media, you know that I have always been outspoken on the issue of Paedocommunion .  It is a theological position and a liturgical practice about which I am passionate.  Having been raised, and having raised my children, at the Table, I cannot imagine attending a church that didn't allow PC.  I hope that when I am old and gray, I will still be an advocate for bringing little children to the Sacrament. Throughout the 12 years that I have had this blog, I have written scattered thoughts on the topic, but it appears that I have never written a concise summary of my reasons for affirming PC.  I was thoroughly convinced that I had, but I can't seem to locate it, so I guess I never did.  So, to rectify the omission, here are four reasons I hold to PC. 1) Paedocommunion is Biblical.   Any discussion of the topic should start here, and I would hope that both sides of the debate would make this assertion.  However, let me clarify what I mean when

1 Corinthians, the Covenant Hermeneutic, & Paedocommunion

As an adherent to Paedocommunion  (hereafter PC), I have always found it painfully ironic that Credocommunionists use 1 Corinthians 11 to withhold children (among others) from the Table.  One can imagine St. Paul shaking his head as he watches theologians using his discussion of unity at the Table to divide the body at the Table.  You're missing the point! he would say in exasperation.  Not only does 1 Corinthians 11 not forbid PC; I would go so far as to say that there is no better defense of PC in the New Testament than the epistle of 1 Corinthians. Credocommunionist logic is pretty straightforward.  1 Corinthians 11:28 says, "Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup."  If, they argue, one is unable to fulfill the exhortation to examine himself, then he may not eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  This is a pretty logical deduction, right? Credobaptists would adamantly agree.  Acts 2:38 says, "Repent and be baptized...&quo

Why do you go to church on Sunday?

Why do you go to church on Sunday?  I would assume there are many reasons, but what is the primary reason that you get up on a cold, snowy Sunday morning and get your butt to church?  Further, why has the Church of Jesus Christ consistently gathered together on Sundays (among other days) for the last 2000 years? Throughout my 34 years of church attendance I would have proffered a variety of answers to that question.  As a child I'm sure I went to church because I had to, to see my cousins (who happened to be my best friends), to get bread and wine (weekly communion for the win), etc.  As my faith matured in adulthood these reasons remained, hopefully deepening, but to them were added concepts like rest and theological training. As I moved into Anglicanism I was struck by the deliberate focus on worship .  Why do Christians gather on Sunday morning?  To worship God!  Are teaching and fellowship important?  Absolutely!  Are they aspects of worship?  Certainly!  Is either the primary