The Heresy of Cornelius Van Til??? (pt 2b)

[8675965]

Thanks for defending "KEES"! YeeYah!

[charliejunfan1]

Thanks for defending the Til!!

[Arrsht]

Thanks for putting these videos together. I have found that with the Clarkians that I have met that they misrepresent those with whom they do not agree with. Disregard for context seems to be what they utilize to make their case.

[brandonadams07]

For Van Til, "corresponds" does not mean "is". The statement you quoted does nothing to disprove what Robbins' has said. It fits quite well with Van Til's understanding of the analogy between our "truth" and God's "truth".

Also, simply because Van Til did not acknowledge the consequences of his view of logic (skepticism), doesn't mean that Robbins is wrong.

Thanks for your moral grandstanding.

[NeoConvert]

I did not at all claim that "corresponds" means "is." In fact, were I to do so, I'd be claiming the identity of man's knowledge and God's knowledge, and thus putting man in the place of God; the very thing Van Til is so meticulously trying to guard against.

If you think that there is substance to the distinction you're trying to draw, you might want to suggest to what sort of relation "corresponds" here refers.

Of course, for VT, it refers to the OBJECT of knowledge.

Thus no skepticism.

[bs2174]

True apologetics at work.