Customer Reviews

Defense of the Faith:

5 star:		(12)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

The Defense of the Faith is Prof. Van Til's book about the subject for which he is most famous, presuppositional apologetics. I know many Christians wish to be able to defend their faith and to be "prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope" that they have (I Peter 3:15). But terms like "presuppositional" can be intimidating, so I will try to explain what Dr. Van Til is communicating in this book, as well as to answer the "Empty Assertions" criticism of the reader, who, I am afraid, has not dealt very squarely with the position of Van Til.

"Presuppositional" means that the argument for the truth of the claims of Scripture focuses on the presuppositions, or assumptions, of non-Christian thought, and it is founded on and proceeds according to the presuppositions of Biblical, Christian thought. The most foundational idea of non-Christian thought is the idea of human autonomy. According to the Bible, the unbeliever's heart is naturally at war with God after the fall. God has revealed that He is the Creator, and that man, whether he wants to or not, must always ultimately face the fact the he is the creature, and is responsible to and dependent on God. He knows that this is true. However, after the fall, the unbeliever does not want to be responsible to or dependent on God. He suppresses the truth that he knows in unrighteousness (Rom. 1:21). He wants to determine for himself the significance and purpose of his life. He makes his own mind the ultimate criterion for all interpretation and for all activity. The claims of God are not satisfactory to him, so he rejects them. The mind of the creature sits in judgment over its Creator. Thus all human reasoning and interpretation is inescapably and fundamentally ethical by nature. Van Til's argument is that a truly Biblical apologetic must confront the unbeliever at this very point.

The result is that there is no intellectual or moral neutrality. The unbeliever is at war with his Creator, and his mind rejects the authority of God in favor of his own autonomy. The believer, on the other hand, has a new heart, and a new spirit put within in him by God, and he submits to God's Word and authority. The apologetic enterprise must be undertaken within one or the other of these two frameworks. All too often, however, Christians do not live up to the principle that is within them. They unconsciously approach the unbeliever as if he really were autonomous and in the position of sitting in judgment over God and His Word. They may adjust the presentation of the gospel truth to make it more palatable to the rebellious sinner. The result is that the unbeliever is never really challenged at the root of his problem.

As a concrete example, Van Til says that, for an unbeliever "Granted he allows that Christ actually arose from the grave, he will say that this proves nothing more than that something very unusual took place in the case of that man Jesus." This is because as humans we do not encounter any facts in isolation, but we interpret and assign meaning to all the facts that we see around us. The unbeliever always interprets the facts on the basis of his presupposition of autonomy. Van Til is saying that the unbeliever's ultimate problem is not an intellectual problem, but an ethical problem. Any apologetic endeavor that focuses exclusively on the intellectual differences between believers and unbelievers and does not confront the ethical differences, is not addressing the unbeliever's problem.

One Amazon.com reader has been dissatisfied with Van Til's approach. His criticism centers on Van Til's claim that all reasoning is circular reasoning. Smart people don't reason circularly: "The Bible is true because it says so." But we have to think carefully about the argument. If Van Til is right that every human is either in rebellion against God's authority or by grace has been transformed to be submissive to God's authority, then it is impossible to reason apart from one of these two frameworks or "presuppositions". Thus, all human reasoning cannot be anything but circular in the sense that as finite creatures we cannot engage in any intellectual activity in a vacuum, but always start with some foundation.

I can't believe that Van Til's point is too much of a stretch for people in the 21st century, when we look at the current climate of moral and epistemological relativism. It has been over 200 years now since Kant showed us that the human consciousness inescapably alters and shapes the reality that we encounter. The current epistemological and moral vacuum in Western culture is simply the consistent working out of non-Christian presuppositions. Of course, Van Til is arguing that mankind in fact cannot escape the knowledge of God that is within them and the fact that all human interpretation is derivative, not determinative. He is saying that as Christians, we should not assume and submit to the unbeliever's view of human autonomy and intellectual and ethical neutrality.

I think that this book is truly significant and profound, and that Christians really need to come to grips with its ideas in order to make a fully Biblical presentation of the truth that is faithful to God's Word. I will not pretend that this is an easy book to read. There are many important points that I think are very clear, and there are some points that I have not yet been able to understand myself. Dr. Van Til's writings are notoriously intimidating to lay people. If you are serious, it is well worth reading this book, and I think that there is enough that is perfectly clear to greatly benefit even those who are not as interested in the more esoteric portions. If you are interested in the content, but are afraid of the level, you may prefer something like John Frame's book "Apologetics to the Glory of God." Van Til's book is absolutely not written to convince unbelievers that they should become Christians. It is written to help Christians understand how they can "sanctify Christ as Lord" in their hearts in order to give a consistently Biblical defense of their faith that will truly challenge the unbeliever at the root of his problem. For all serious students of apologetics, this book is indispensable.

Van Til systematically analyzes the essential equivalence of thought in the arminiun view of salavation and the world's view of the autonomy of man. He further points out the conclusion of modern secular philosophers that if man is indeed "autonomous" then there is really no control other than chance/fate and he is not truly "autonomous" but a slave to chance....further, if at the mercy of chance he is left in despair. The presupposition of ultimate truth in God alone is not just preferrable but necessary for any cogent understanding of reality. The beginning of wisdom is with God...not man. Without God, there is no basis for any reason, only despair.

van til is one of the best presuppositionalists. this volume is an introductionto to his thought packed with clever quips. especially helpful is his emphasis that man cannot start from himself, entirely separated from supernatural revelation, and find and codify God. instead, man's very being is immutably dependent on God. reading in tandem with carl henry, gordon clark, and the simpler schaeffer help one to understand presuppositionalism and inevitably hone one's theology regardless of outlook.

This is the book I personally consider to be THE masterwork of twentieth cetury thought on apologetics. Its only fault lies in the fact that it follows a mostly negative approach, critiquing contemporary evangelical apologetic methods. Van Til's appoach stresses the idea that arguing for the gospel must be based on faith, and not on shared presuppositions with the non-believer. He argues that the use of evidence merely persuades the non-believer that God MIGHT exist, which is what he already believes. Extremely procative and highly recommended for anyone with a background in philosophy.

This is a profound and wonderful book. If I could split out the stars then I would give 5 stars for content but only 3 stars for writing and clarity, hence the averaged out 4 stars. In short, Van Til's apologetic approach will enable you to show why Christian Theism is the necessary precondition for doing this average and any average. In fact, Van Til goes so far to argue that Christian Theism is the necessary precondition for all knowledge, logic, ethics, and discussion. Far fetched? It may appear that way initially, but after studying Van Til's book I am convinced of his approach.

When you are engaged in an apologetic discussion with your atheist friend they assert, "God does not exist!" All too often both parties assume they agree on who god is from the outset and begin to argue accordingly. For example, the Christian is in agreement with the atheist that "allah" does not exist. Van Til argues that this, assuming both parties agree on what is being discussed, is not the right approach. It is first necessary to ask, "What type of god are we discussing?" This is why Van Til begins his book with theology, asking Who is god? Once who God is is settled, then Van Til moves to a discussion of Christian Metaphysics, Epistemology and Ethics. In each of these Van Til emphasizes the Creator-creature distinction, which is important and essential to all of his thinking and, I believe, appropriate Christian thinking. He then systematically moves through a Christian approach to apologetics, including the "point of contact" with the non-believer, which is the imago dei, "the problem of method", the place of authority and "reason" in the discussion, as well as a discussion on common grace, argument by presupposition and a closes with a discussion on several different Reformed views.

Van Til's opening four chapters is easily worth the cost of the book. His Creator-creature distinction and its affect on metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics is beautiful. It's the sort of writing that says, "Now that makes sense! WOW! That makes so much more sense!" Van Til sheds a lot of light into the dark world of "metaphysics" and "epistemology". And, as should be expected, this is done by God's Truth.

Despite the genius of the book, I believe, there are short comings. One, Van Til's writing style. He is not always clear. Two, this may be due to my ignorance, but I wish he would spell out the implications a little more. I feel like he jumps a few steps to his conclusion with the average reader, like myself, missing important steps along the way. This doesn't nullify his overall outlook and approach, but it does take from the book. Again, could be my fault, but, I believe, the reader would do well to brush up on idealist philosophy and basic concepts before he delves into Van Til. Along these lines, if you are not already familiar with presuppositional apologetics and Van Til, then John Frame and Greg Bahnsen's works on Van Til's apologetic outlook are must readings.

All in all, this is a great book. It could be improved slightly by filling in some of the arguments and having a good editor rework some of the wording and providing footnotes for clarity, but this book is a classic and a must read.

This whole country including most Christians are being dumbed down. More need to read and meditate on the works of Godly men such as Van Til so that they can grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ instead of turning Christianity into an emotional "feel good" experience.

"Science is absolutely impossible on the non-Christian principle." What does the author mean with that assertion? Just suppose there is a man made of water in an infinitely extended and bottomless ocean of water. Desiring to get out of the water, he makes a ladder of water. He sets this ladder upon the water and against water and then attempts to climb out of the water.
So hopeless and senseless a picture must be drawn of the natural man`s methodology based as it is upon the assumption his own rationality is a product of chance. So on what is he relying? On his assumption even the laws of logic which he employs are products of chance. The rationality and purpose that he may be searching for are still bound to be products of chance. So whence comes his certainty to master his theories and know what truth is? From chance!
It appears to the author that Christian theism which was first rejected because of its supposed authoritarian character, is the only position which gives human reason a field for successful operation and a method of true progress in knowledge. Why? Because the ground is solid and logic. The Christian belief is the only one which supports in its statements a world that can be investigated by the human mind, because this world was created with laws and methods that can be found and replicated by man.
So the author claims that only on the presupposition of Christian theism a valid science is possible. Any other presupposition is leading to a wrong way with sooner or later totally misleading conclusions and results of research. The philosophy is giving the interpretation of data.
Without the truth of Christianity, the author says, there would be no possibility of the testing of one hypothesis against another. Just on the basis of facts a testing is senseless, because brute facts, not created, not controlled by God are blind, mute facts. They have no discernible character, because character they can have only in an organized world obeying God given laws. Chance means chaos. Chaotic must be the facts if there is no God. Brute facts cannot constitute the reality which Christians and non-Christians know in common in order by it to test the hypothesis of the existence or the non-existence of God.
A scientist is able to formulate and discover only because he operates on secretly Christian premises while denying that faith. Is this called schizophrenic? Factuality apart from God is totally meaningless factuality. Men cannot escape God nor can they shut him out. If they attempt to think without him as their premise, they simply reintroduce his attributes in the form of miraculous potentialities and processes which reduce science to irrationalism and self-contradiction. Therefore modern science can replace religion, because it is the new religion, based on mythical presumptions. Here the myth of evolution which gives man the freedom of the compelling reality of God as creator.
The contradiction of modern science theory of evolution is that it proclaims the meaningless and chaos as its source but denies that its conclusions are not chaotic and not a matter of pure chance. The theory of evolution requires a belief that somehow all things arose out of chance, out of the fortuitous. Evolutionary science denies spontaneous generation as a fact but requires it in theory in order to account for the universe. This is the reason why so many put their hopes in finding evidence of life on another planet. Science this wants a universe of law and of causality without God and it would rather ascribe all the magnificent order of the universe to chaos rather than to God. Men will either presuppose God, or they will presuppose themselves as the basic reality of being.
The author concludes: "Now if our contention that the evolution-hypothesis is a part of an anti-theistic theory of reality is correct, then we must do away with every easy-going attitude." Why? Because their adherents will claim to have the only acceptable truth and wage war against those who oppose them. So far Van Til!
No good prospects. The lobby of the science is indeed conspicuous. Should they control society as modern priests and caretakers of truth? The author has written a disputatious and thought-provoking work, presumably condemned by modern scientists. Therefore you should read it.

Cornelius Van Til was born in 1895, in the Netherlands and at the age of ten his family moved to Indiana. Later Van Til earned a Th.M. and a Ph.D. "The Defense of the Faith" is part of Van Til's groundbreaking presuppositional apologetic method. This volume is essential for any Christian philosopher and apologist.

In this treatise, the author aims to press the most scripturally faithful and effectual apologetic method to defend the Faith and present the Triune God to the lost. Van Til distinguishes his system from that of RCC, neo-orthodoxy of Barth, and others.

Van Til writes: "The whole problem of knowledge has constantly been that of bringing the one and the many together. When man looks about him and within him, he sees that there is a great variety of facts. The question that comes up at once is whether there is any unity in this variety, whether there is one principle in accordance with which all these many things appear and occur. All non-Christian thought, if it has utilized the idea of a supra-mundane existence at all, has used this supra-mundane existence as furnishing only the unity or the a priori aspect of knowledge, while it has maintained that the a posteriori aspect of knowledge is something that is furnished by the universe."

He adds for one to have any knowledge that "... there must be in God an absolute system of knowledge" (p 61).

Furthermore he presses the necessity of scripture: "But I do, of course, confess that what Scripture teaches may properly be spoken of as a system of truth. God identifies the Scriptures as his Word. And he himself, as he tells us, exists as an internally self-coherent being. His revelation of himself to man cannot be anything but internally coherent" (p. 205).

Many have enthusiastically embraced his forceful apologetic as he advocates: "The natural man must be blasted out of his hideouts... the Reformed apologist throws down the gauntlet and challenges his opponent to a duel of life and death from the start."

Van Til defines some important terms: "Philosophy, as usually defined, deals with a theory of reality, with a theory of knowledge, and with a theory of ethics. That is to say philosophies usually undertake to present a life and world view. They deal not only with that which man can directly experience by means of his senses but also, and ofttimes especially, with the presuppositions of experience. In short, they deal with that which Christian theology speaks of as God. On the other hand Christian theology deals not only with God; it deals also with the world.... Philosophy and science deal more especially with man in his relation to the cosmos and theology deals more especially with man in his relation to God. But this is only a matter of degree."

Van Til taught, inspired, and mentored many erudite scholars. Quotes from some of the brightest:

William Edgar states: "Van Til showed the necessity of knowing God as a basis for knowing anything at all."

John Frame opines: "Van Til's apologetics is essentially simple, however complicated its elaborations. It makes two basic assertions: (1) that human beings are obligated to presuppose God in all of their thinking, and (2) that unbelievers resist this obligation in every aspect of thought and life." (Westminster Theological Journal Vol. 47, 1985)

K. Scott Oliphint asserts: "Van Til, though speaking in another context, approves of all kinds of reasoning based on the priority of revelation."

Greg Bahnsen, a popular Van Tilian scholar and the man "atheists feared the most," stated that "For Van Til, like Augustine, reason is not the platform (precondition) for faith, but vice versa" (Greg L Bahnsen, "Van Til's Apologetic," p. 54).

Bahnsen adjoins: "It could be said that Van Til has labored to rid our thinking about apologetics, theology, philosophy, and evangelism of misleading dichotomies between them - polarizations that serve to overlook the ethically qualified character of man's every intellectual ability and effort. There are to be no other gods before the face of the Lord (according to the first commandment, Ex. 20:3), no other authorities over our thinking that detract from submission to the revealed word of God. The Lord's claim upon us, even upon our thinking and reasoning, is absolute and unchallengeable - just because He is the Lord (Rom. 3:4; 9:20; 11:33-34). Therefore, "take heed lest there shall be anyone who robs you by means of his philosophy, even vain deceit, which is after the tradition of men, after the rudimentary principles of the world, and not after Christ" (Col. 2:8). In that light, we must not artificially separate positive statement (theology) from its defense (apologetics), or separate the appeal for mental change (evangelism) from the intellectual reason for such change (apologetics), or separate general reflection upon conceptual foundations, (philosophy) from the particular content of Christian concepts (theology, apologetics). Van Til rejects each of these dichotomies in order that our thinking and scholarship will not be divided into two phases, the first being autonomous and religiously neutral, and the second being submissive to Christ and biblically faithful. For Van Til, like Augustine, reason is not the platform (precondition) for faith, but vice versa" ("Van Til's Apologetic: Readings & Analysis," p. 54)
---
But our God is in heaven; He does whatever He pleases
(Psalms 115:3).

As a PA I also would add: A certain and simple argument for the existence of God is: Without God one cannot account for anything. God is the ground and source for the laws of logic, moral law, mathematics, and everything else in the cosmos. This is an argument that is absolutely true. The truth is simple and it is powerful. One must employ changeless universal truths when one assesses, ponders, and communicates things and their meaning in our world. Only God, who is all-knowing and all-powerful, can ground immutable universals.

The great thing about employing this argument is that it grows in power when the unbeliever attacks it. The argument grows in force because the unbeliever must use the laws of logic to make his intellectual challenge. These laws of thought require God. For God alone supplies the pre-essential environment for the laws of logic. Thus every time an unbeliever rationally attacks theism he is actually demonstrating that God lives. Without God (He alone can ground the laws of logic) he cannot make any rational assertion.

The old science-fiction movie that has a huge electric monster on the loose illustrates this point. The monster in this thriller grows larger and stronger every time someone uses a weapon in attempting to kill it. The monster is ready to take over America, and the President orders the army to hit it with an atomic bomb. The troops launch the bomb and as the mushroom cloud slowly starts to dissipate, when the smoke clears, they are stunned by the horror of horrors: the energy monster survived. Not only does the monster survive, he now is ten times larger. The energy monster absorbed the massive energy from the bomb. It did not get weaker, but grew in size and strength. Similarly, the unbeliever will attempt to fire intellectual weapons at this "argument from the impossibility of the contrary"(Bahnsen). Nevertheless, all their attacks will only be consumed by the truth, while the defense of the truth grows stronger and larger. There is nothing a skeptic can assert without ultimately relying on theism, since God alone provides the pre-essential environment for the laws of logic that must be utilized in their attacks. Therefore the unbeliever's argument will always presuppose God because the unbeliever cannot supply the preconditions for the non-physical, unchanging, universal and atemporal laws of logic (God is non-physical, unchanging, universal in power and reach, and atemporal). The triune God is the preexisting foundation for all debate, even a debate over the existence of God.

Whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it... Therefore let all the house of Israel know ASSUREDLY that God has made this Jesus whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:24 & 36).
God Does Exist!: Defending the faith using presuppositional apologetics, evidence, and the impossibility of the contrary
Presuppositional Apologetics Examines Mormonism: How Van Til's Apologetic Refutes Mormon Theology
One Way to God: Christian Philosophy and Presuppositional Apologetics Examine World ReligionsThere Are Moral Absolutes: How to Be Absolutely Sure That Christianity Alone Supplies

Also see work by James Anderson, Michael Butler, Don Collect.

Cornelius Van Til was born in 1895, in the Netherlands, the sixth son of Ite Van Til, at the age of ten his family moved to Indiana. Later Van Til earned a Th.M. and a Ph.D. "The Defense of the Faith" is part of Van Til's groundbreaking presuppositional apologetic method. This volume is essential for any Christian philosopher and apologist.

In this treatise, the author aims to press the most scripturally faithful and effectual apologetic method to defend the Faith and present the Triune God to the lost. Van Til distinguishes his system from that of RCC, neo-orthodoxy of Barth, and others.

Van Til writes: "The whole problem of knowledge has constantly been that of bringing the one and the many together. When man looks about him and within him, he sees that there is a great variety of facts. The question that comes up at once is whether there is any unity in this variety, whether there is one principle in accordance with which all these many things appear and occur. All non-Christian thought, if it has utilized the idea of a supra-mundane existence at all, has used this supra-mundane existence as furnishing only the unity or the a priori aspect of knowledge, while it has maintained that the a posteriori aspect of knowledge is something that is furnished by the universe."

He adds for one to have any knowledge that "... there must be in God an absolute system of knowledge" (p 61).

Furthermore he presses the necessity of scripture: "But I do, of course, confess that what Scripture teaches may properly be spoken of as a system of truth. God identifies the Scriptures as his Word. And he himself, as he tells us, exists as an internally self-coherent being. His revelation of himself to man cannot be anything but internally coherent" (p. 205).

Many have enthusiastically embraced his forceful apologetic as he advocates: "The natural man must be blasted out of his hideouts... the Reformed apologist throws down the gauntlet and challenges his opponent to a duel of life and death from the start."

Greg Bahnsen, a popular Van Tilian scholar and the man "atheists feared the most," stated that "For Van Til, like Augustine, reason is not the platform (precondition) for faith, but vice versa" (Greg L Bahnsen, "Van Til's Apologetic," p. 54).

Bahnsen adjoins: "It could be said that Van Til has labored to rid our thinking about apologetics, theology, philosophy, and evangelism of misleading dichotomies between them - polarizations that serve to overlook the ethically qualified character of man's every intellectual ability and effort. There are to be no other gods before the face of the Lord (according to the first commandment, Ex. 20:3), no other authorities over our thinking that detract from submission to the revealed word of God. The Lord's claim upon us, even upon our thinking and reasoning, is absolute and unchallengeable - just because He is the Lord (Rom. 3:4; 9:20; 11:33-34). Therefore, "take heed lest there shall be anyone who robs you by means of his philosophy, even vain deceit, which is after the tradition of men, after the rudimentary principles of the world, and not after Christ" (Col. 2:8). In that light, we must not artificially separate positive statement (theology) from its defense (apologetics), or separate the appeal for mental change (evangelism) from the intellectual reason for such change (apologetics), or separate general reflection upon conceptual foundations, (philosophy) from the particular content of Christian concepts (theology, apologetics). Van Til rejects each of these dichotomies in order that our thinking and scholarship will not be divided into two phases, the first being autonomous and religiously neutral, and the second being submissive to Christ and biblically faithful. For Van Til, like Augustine, reason is not the platform (precondition) for faith, but vice versa" ("Van Til's Apologetic: Readings & Analysis," p. 54)

Van Til defines some important terms: "Philosophy, as usually defined, deals with a theory of reality, with a theory of knowledge, and with a theory of ethics. That is to say philosophies usually undertake to present a life and world view. They deal not only with that which man can directly experience by means of his senses but also, and ofttimes especially, with the presuppositions of experience. In short, they deal with that which Christian theology speaks of as God. On the other hand Christian theology deals not only with God; it deals also with the world.... Philosophy and science deal more especially with man in his relation to the cosmos and theology deals more especially with man in his relation to God. But this is only a matter of degree."

Van Til taught, inspired, and mentored many erudite scholars. Quotes from some of the brightest:

William Edgar states: "Van Til showed the necessity of knowing God as a basis for knowing anything at all."

John Frame opines: "Van Til's apologetics is essentially simple, however complicated its elaborations. It makes two basic assertions: (1) that human beings are obligated to presuppose God in all of their thinking, and (2) that unbelievers resist this obligation in every aspect of thought and life." (Westminster Theological Journal Vol. 47, 1985)

K. Scott Oliphint asserts: "Van Til, though speaking in another context, approves of all kinds of reasoning based on the priority of revelation."
---
But our God is in heaven; He does whatever He pleases
(Psalms 115:3).

As a PA I also would add: A certain and simple argument for the existence of God is: Without God one cannot account for anything. God is the ground and source for the laws of logic, moral law, mathematics, and everything else in the cosmos. This is an argument that is absolutely true. The truth is simple and it is powerful. One must employ changeless universal truths when one assesses, ponders, and communicates things and their meaning in our world. Only God, who is all-knowing and all-powerful, can ground immutable universals.

The great thing about employing this argument is that it grows in power when the unbeliever attacks it. The argument grows in force because the unbeliever must use the laws of logic to make his intellectual challenge. These laws of thought require God. For God alone supplies the pre-essential environment for the laws of logic. Thus every time an unbeliever rationally attacks theism he is actually demonstrating that God lives. Without God (He alone can ground the laws of logic) he cannot make any rational assertion.

The old science-fiction movie that has a huge electric monster on the loose illustrates this point. The monster in this thriller grows larger and stronger every time someone uses a weapon in attempting to kill it. The monster is ready to take over America, and the President orders the army to hit it with an atomic bomb. The troops launch the bomb and as the mushroom cloud slowly starts to dissipate, when the smoke clears, they are stunned by the horror of horrors: the energy monster survived. Not only does the monster survive, he now is ten times larger. The energy monster absorbed the massive energy from the bomb. It did not get weaker, but grew in size and strength. Similarly, the unbeliever will attempt to fire intellectual weapons at this "argument from the impossibility of the contrary"(Bahnsen). Nevertheless, all their attacks will only be consumed by the truth, while the defense of the truth grows stronger and larger. There is nothing a skeptic can assert without ultimately relying on theism, since God alone provides the pre-essential environment for the laws of logic that must be utilized in their attacks. Therefore the unbeliever's argument will always presuppose God because the unbeliever cannot supply the preconditions for the non-physical, unchanging, universal and atemporal laws of logic (God is non-physical, unchanging, universal in power and reach, and atemporal). The triune God is the preexisting foundation for all debate, even a debate over the existence of God.

Whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it... Therefore let all the house of Israel know ASSUREDLY that God has made this Jesus whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:24 & 36).
God Does Exist!: Defending the faith using presuppositional apologetics, evidence, and the impossibility of the contrary
Presuppositional Apologetics Examines Mormonism: How Van Til's Apologetic Refutes Mormon Theology
One Way to God: Christian Philosophy and Presuppositional Apologetics Examine World ReligionsThere Are Moral Absolutes: How to Be Absolutely Sure That Christianity Alone Supplies

Also see work by James Anderson, Michael Butler, Don Collect.

Van Til wrote several books, many of them not widely known even among people 'in the know'. None are as good as this: this sets forth Van Til's apologetic in a way that is easy to understand.

However, the one major problem with this book is the pure theoretical nature of it - it isn't possible to take the theory out into the marketplace after reading it, which is why Richard Pratt did so well with his little book. I would suggest people start with Richard Pratt's book, then move to Van Til after.

Also, this is not a book you should buy to look good in your bookcase, or leave on your coffee table for guests to see, and unless you have a strong presence, I wouldn't even read it in public!