J. V. Fesko’s Reforming Apologetics: A Review by James N. Anderson

From the Analogical Thoughts blog of James N. Anderson, a review of J. V. Fesko’s Reforming Apologetics.

Anderson writes, here:

So the debate isn’t about whether we should make use of natural revelation, but rather how we do so. Van Til, following Calvin, only insists that the two books of divine revelation be read in conjunction, as they were always intended by their Author to be read. When it comes to apologetics, the Christian faith must be defended “as a unit”; that is, as an integrated, coherent, self-interpreting “system of truth” that coordinates general and special revelation. For this reason, Van Til criticized forms of natural theology that attempted to interpret natural revelation in isolation from biblical revelation, on the basis of a ‘neutral’ epistemology (whether rationalist, empiricist, or some hybrid of the two).

James N. Anderson