Christocentric Philosophy

This is going to be an exposition and defense of an argument that was presented briefly here . It is strongly advised that the reader, if they haven’t already, reads that post for it is important in understanding the argument that will be tackled here. I will be deploying a transcendental argument in order to show that the possibility of human knowledge presupposes (1) a Creator of the universe, and (2) the availability of revelation from that Creator to man. The argument turns upon the notion of “conceptual inadequacy” so let us start there. Conceptual Inadequacy  What exactly is “conceptual inadequacy” and what does it entail? Let us define a conceptual framework as the set of concepts C possessed by a subject S. A conceptual framework is important to a subject because it is that in virtue of which a subject interprets and makes sense of his experience. If one comes across an object—say, a PlayStation 5 game console—one’s conceptual framework, consisting of the concepts of game, cons

Van Til frequently made use of the phrase “final reference point of predication”. What did he mean by this? This concept is a very central one in Van Til’s overall transcendental programme. Hence, understanding it would better help us grasp Van Til’s system and his arguments for that system. Van Til constantly maintained that the Christian worldview and its doctrine of the Trinity is the precondition of all human knowledge and predication. In this post, we would be examining why Van Til thought this. Predication in Van Til’s System Van Til believed that a truly biblical approach to apologetics required that apologist to challenge the unbeliever’s presumed autonomy. He held that all unbelieving and autonomous philosophies rendered human predication impossible: In seeking to follow the example of Paul, Reformed Apologetics needs, above all else, to make clear from the beginning that it is challenging the wisdom of the natural man on the authority of the self-attesting Christ speaking in