Circling on God: Conclusion

This is the final post in the “Circling on God” series. If you have just come across this post please read these first:

Circling on God: Introduction

What is Circular Reasoning?

Van Til’s Methodology and Common Objections

Now for the conclusion.

*******

As argued above, a truly biblical apologetic is one that gives God the most glory in its method. All human reasoning is ultimately circular and the difference between Christian and non-Christian thinking lies in the presuppositions on which each system rests. The Christian system ultimately presupposes God as the precondition for all knowing while the unbeliever, while knowing God to be the truth and living, at least in part, as though this were true, attempts to suppress this knowledge by presupposing the autonomy of man to be the basis for his thinking. The latter engages itself in a vicious circularity that is ultimately self-defeating while the former glorifies God by giving him the thanks and glory for everything that can be known.

The evidentialist method of apologetics, while no doubt held and practiced by many sincere Christians, ultimately wraps itself up in the same problem as non-Christian philosophical systems by engaging in a vicious circularity with autonomous man at the center. Therefore, in light of the examination of 1 Peter 3:15, the evidentialist method of apologetics should not be used by Christians who desire to truly honor God in their apologetic method because Christ has not been sanctified as Lord over all parts of the system it presupposes. However if the Christian apologist unashamedly admits God to be the foundation of their thinking and challenges the unbeliever to repent of his suppression of what he knows to be true, he will glorify God by circling and depending on him.

Van Til concludes his argument to the unbeliever in an appropriate fashion:

But since I believe in such a God, a God who has conditioned you as well as me, I know that you can to your own satisfaction, by the help of the biologists, the psychologists, the logicians, and the Bible critics reduce everything I have said this afternoon and evening to the circular meanderings of a hopeless authoritarian. Well, my meanderings have, to be sure, been circular; they have made everything turn on God. So now I shall leave you with Him, and with His mercy. [1]

Clearly, it is God who will ultimately determine the outcome of apologetic discussions. Without the intervention of his saving grace, all unbelievers will continue in their suppression of the truth in unrighteousness as covenant breakers. Assuming this to be true, Van Til makes clear again that his argument has presupposed the existence of God throughout. And he leaves the unbeliever in God’s hands, making clear that only by God’s mercy can he be saved.

[1]John M. Frame, “Van Til and the Ligonier Apologetic,” Westminster Theological Journal 47 no2 (Fall 1985): p. 143.

*******