William D. Dennison > Quotes

“The transcendental critique reveals the deep roots of sin in the heart of man, and it demands the purity of biblical truth in the church as well as in the individual Christian.”
― William D. Dennison, In Defense of the Eschaton: Essays in Reformed Apologetics

“Contrary to what many think, the basis for Van Til’s transcendental critique is not obscure or theoretical. His critique of human thought merely employs Christ’s teaching that out of the heart flow the issues of life (cf. Matt 12:34–35; 15:18–19; Mark 7:21; Luke 12:34; 16:15). By participating in Christ’s words, the apologist is to uncover and expose the heart of humanity.”
― William D. Dennison, In Defense of the Eschaton: Essays in Reformed Apologetics

“in my judgment, Frame, akin to Aquinas, is viewing the Christian story in accord with the logical construction and the empirical experience of language. If he actually followed Van Til, he would perceive that language has meaning only in the context of the biblical story. In other words, language has meaning only in the context of a philosophy of history as defined by Van Til and Vos.”
― William D. Dennison, In Defense of the Eschaton: Essays in Reformed Apologetics

“Following Vos, Van Til places epistemology where it truly belongs, within the eschatological status of history: either one is a member of the kingdom of God, with the knowledge of the truth (grounded in the triune God of the Bible), or one is a member of the kingdom of Satan, with the knowledge of a lie (grounded in the deception of Satan). In redemptive history, there is no other ground for human knowledge. One either stands with Christ as the source of all knowledge or against him.”
― William D. Dennison, In Defense of the Eschaton: Essays in Reformed Apologetics

“Thereby, Van Til believed that one must view the facts of the universe in union with their Creator to view them rightly. In other words, our concepts and judgments of truth cannot be isolated from the ground of truthfulness—the ontological Trinity. Hence, Van Til’s view of epistemology is quite simple: to understand, know, and interpret the facts correctly one must begin with the one who creates the facts.”
― William D. Dennison, In Defense of the Eschaton: Essays in Reformed Apologetics

“despite Frame’s ability to view the holistic character of Van Til’s thought, his preoccupation with linguistic and conceptual units, especially in the context of perspectivalism, has contributed to his failure to comprehend the full Archimedean point of Van Til’s epistemology. In other words, for Frame, epistemology must be grounded in the normative, situational, and existential perspectives rather than the philosophy of history as defined by Van Til.”
― William D. Dennison, In Defense of the Eschaton: Essays in Reformed Apologetics

“Van Til, Steen’s beloved teacher, claimed, however, that only the Reformed tradition can provide the rightful context for the subject of common grace. After all, for Rome and the Arminian “it is a foregone conclusion that there are large areas of life on which the believer and the unbeliever agree without difference.”76”
― William D. Dennison, In Defense of the Eschaton: Essays in Reformed Apologetics

“For a church that proclaims the truth of the gospel, and for the believer who loves Christ, apologetics is not only the defending of the Christ of Scripture from the world, but also the constant cleansing of our union with Christ from the pollution of sinful thought. Through the power of Christ’s Spirit, we are to live out our self-conscious identity in Christ (Gal 2:20). As pastors prepare to preach, the transcendental method will need to be employed. As the church makes decisions about her philosophy of ministry, the method will need to be employed.”
― William D. Dennison, In Defense of the Eschaton: Essays in Reformed Apologetics

“history is not an autonomous or complementary category of epistemology. Rather, Van Til held that an ontological knowledge of God is given to mankind in history by the revelation of the economic Trinity. Specifically, all epistemological issues within the creation have their initial solution in the economic, historical revelation of the God of Scripture, which God’s ontology inherently grounds. Thereby, Van Til disclosed his obsession with consistency and Christian orthodoxy; a thorough Christian-theistic epistemology coheres in the context of God’s ontological being as well as the economic disclosure of his being—the two cannot be separated.51 For this reason, Van Til declared that a philosophy of history is the key to a Christian-theistic epistemology; our knowledge of anything is dependent upon the revelation of the economic Trinity in history.”
― William D. Dennison, In Defense of the Eschaton: Essays in Reformed Apologetics

“Although Kuyper, Bavinck, and Hepp attempted to distance themselves from scholasticism and classicism, nevertheless, Van Til believed that they never overcame abstraction. That is to say, although they gave God the strategic place in their system—the starting point and foundation of knowing, understanding, and interpreting all things—nevertheless, they permitted the non-Christian to define the terms they adopted as God’s terms. Hence, in the realm of natural and general revelation, God is merely the prelude and the appendix in the structure; rather, according to Van Til, he must be the Being who defines the entire structure. Only in this context can the structure be properly holistic and concrete.”
― William D. Dennison, In Defense of the Eschaton: Essays in Reformed Apologetics

“After the Christian apologist has uncovered the central presupposition of his opponent, he is in a position to move on to the next step: to demonstrate that his opponent cannot live consistently from his presupposition(s). Keep in mind that, according to Van Til, apologetics is not a battle between competing presuppositions. The object of apologetics is not to show that my presupposition is better than your presupposition. Rather, for the Christian apologist, the presupposition of the absolute authority and truth of the self-attesting Christ of Scripture calls all men to repentance and faith in Christ as their presuppositions and systems of thought are brought into the open. For Van Til, there is an antithesis between the Christian presupposition and all other presuppositions.”
― William D. Dennison, In Defense of the Eschaton: Essays in Reformed Apologetics

“As most Van Tilians realize, Van Til fought diligently to purge the Reformed tradition from the remnants of scholasticism that remained in the thought of Old Princeton, Kuyper, and Bavinck. In light of that purging, presently it seems that those Van Tilians influenced by Frame are unsatisfied with Van Til’s view that the sole Archimedean point of a Christian epistemology is the ontological and economic Trinity. Henceforth, these Van Tilians are beginning to supplement the ground of epistemology with something within the creation. As I see it, Frame has been the catalyst for this movement; he is the transitional figure. In this context, I predict that there will be a renewed appreciation for Aquinas and scholasticism, even among Van Tilians.”
― William D. Dennison, In Defense of the Eschaton: Essays in Reformed Apologetics