B.A. Bosserman - The Trinity and the Vindication of Christian Paradox: An Interpretation and Refinement of the Theological Apologetic of Cornelius Van Til

The Trinity and the Vindication of Christian Paradox

An Interpretation and Refinement of the Theological Apologetic of Cornelius Van Til

B. A. Bosserman

Foreword by K. Scott Oliphint

The Trinity and the Vindication of Christian Paradox

An Interpretation and Refinement of the Theological Apologetic of Cornelius Van Til

Copyright 2014 B. A. Bosserman. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permissions. Wipf and Stock Publishers, W. th Ave., Suite , Eugene, OR 97401 .

Pickwick Publications

An Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers

W. th Ave., Suite

Eugene, OR 97401

www.wipfandstock.com

ISBN : 978-1-62564-128-1

EISBN : 978-1-63087-496-4

Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

Bosserman, B. A.

The Trinity and the vindication of Christian paradox : an interpretation and refinement of the theological apologetic of Cornelius Van Til / B. A. Bosserman, with a foreword by K. Scott Oliphint

xxiv + p. ; cm. Includes bibliographical references.

ISBN 13: 978-1-62564-128-1

Van Til, Cornelius, 18951987. 2. Apologetics. Trinity. ChristianityPhilosophy. I. Oliphint, K. Scott. II. Title.

BX9225.V37 B788 2014

Manufactured in the U.S.A.

Scripture Quotations are taken from the New American Standard Bible. Copyright 1997 by the Lockman Foundation

To Thomas George Bossserman

Who taught me to love the biblical Scriptures

The Triune God from whom they came

And to whom they bear witness

As one who has labored for decades to understand, articulate, and re -articulate Cornelius Van Tils Reformed approach to the discipline of apologetics, I have normally been aware of other scholars in the field whose concerns have been coincident with mine. One day, I received an email from Brant Bosserman, with his doctoral dissertation attached, from which this work is taken. I had never heard of Dr. Bosserman, so my instinct was to do (unfortunately) what I do with virtually all emails of this natureconsign it to the digital trash bin. I rarely have time to read what is required of me, much less what comes to me out of the blue. But, since this work was focused on Van Tils thought, I decided that I should at least skim it.

My attempt to skim Dr. Bossermans dissertation turned to serious and concentrated reading. I read every page, some more than once. By the time I had finished this work, I recognized that Dr. Bosserman had successfully focused his energies on a topic that is not only central to the Christian faith, but that is central to all of Van Tils thought. I set this work aside and thought, Why hasnt this been done before?

There are a number of responses to that question. One response would be that, though Van Tils apologetic method has its genesis in an affirmation of the ontological Trinity, many of the criticisms of Van Tils thought have, historically, focused on other things. For example, there has been, and continues to be, serious misunderstandings about what, exactly, Van Til means by the notion of presupposition. There have been those who have seen Van Tils rejection of the standard formulations of the theistic proofs as a concession to fideism. There have been, in other words, pressing matters of clarity that needed, and still need, to be addressed. Whatever the reasons, however, the topic that is given its due herein is not by any means tangential to Van Tils thinking; it is the warp and woof of everything that he believed, taught and wrote.

Without question, the most radical, revolutionary, requisite and Reformed aspect of the apologetic set forth by Van Til was his insistence that ones defense of Christianity must begin with the ontological Trinity. No apologist prior to him had argued such a thing, in part because it meant that the discipline of apologetics must self-consciously begin with Scripture. So, says Van Til:

[A] consistently Christian method of apologetic argument, in agreement with its own basic conception of the starting point, must be by presupposition. To argue by presupposition is to indicate what are the epistemological and metaphysical principles that underlie and control ones method. The Reformed apologist will frankly admit that his own methodology presupposes the truth of Christian theism. Basic to all the doctrines of Christian theism is that of the self-contained God, or, if we wish, that of the ontological trinity. It is this notion of the ontological trinity that ultimately controls a truly Christian methodology. Based upon this notion of the ontological trinity and consistent with it, is the concept of the counsel of God according to which all things in the created world are regulated.

Everything that Van Til wrote and taught has its center in the distinctly Christian, biblical truth of Gods Triunity. The fact that God is One in Three must take its rightful place in the theology of any Christian, and especially any Reformed Christian. Not only so, but as goes ones theology, so ought to go ones apologetic; a Trinitarian theology demands a Trinitarian apologetic as well.

But, in spite of Van Tils consistent emphasis throughout his career and his writings, the fact of Gods Triunity has not yet ascended to its rightful place, especially in the area of a Christian defense of the faith, and the theology that must undergird that defense. Generally speaking, when mention is made of Van Tils emphasis on the Trinity, the discussion usually turns to the philosophical problem of the one and the many. Aside from that, little is said, and even less is elaborated.

One can peruse the books and writings of authors who follow in Van Tils line (including mine!) and there will not be a primary and focused articulation of the Trinity, and the implications of that doctrine, in virtually any of them. There is honorable mention made in most works, and some have wanted to move from that doctrine to possible implications, but none of us has, in my opinion, drawn out the deep and rich entailments that a rich, robust, Reformed doctrine of the Trinity requires for the way that we think about the world, about our theology, and about apologetics. This is not as it should be.

We owe Dr. Bosserman a debt of deep gratitude for mounting the difficulties of Van Tils Trinitarian thought, grabbing the reins, spurring it in the side, and moving it forward, as he guides us through the trail of the rich and radical contours that have otherwise been lying pent up and dormant, virtually hidden from view.

With the pathway now clearer because of Dr. Bossermans work, those of us who seek to follow in Van Tils line can better recognize its direction, as well as its boundaries. There will be more brush to clear along the way; a work of this depth and breadth is bound to have a few briars and brambles still remaining in the path. But the Trinitarian trail, mapped out by Van Til, has now been extensively trod. Its end has not been reached, and we may want to sidestep it in places in order to mark off a better side-path, but wisdom points to the trail Dr. Bosserman has blazed as the best place to begin.

K. Scott Oliphint

Professor of Apologetics and Systematic Theology,

Westminster Theological Seminary

. DF, 12122 .

This is based on a thesis originally submitted to the University of Bangor for the award of Doctor of Philosophy in 2011 . Many individuals are deserving of thanks for aiding me to complete that initial project. I wish to thank first of all Dr. Keith Warrington, and especially Professor Julian Ward for their invaluable critique, guidance, and encouragement in the production of the present manuscript. I also thank my father and mother, Tom and Marilyn Bosserman, and sister and brother in-law, Noelle and Jon Baylor for their regular prayer, support, and interest in this project; my brother Dustin Bosserman for thoroughly editing this thesis and engaging its main ideas, despite his fundamental disagreement with Christian theism; and the many theologians who have contributed to Van Til scholarshipJames N. Anderson, John M. Frame, K. Scott Oliphint, Vern S. Poythress, Ralph Allan Smith, and Lane G. Tiptonwhose influence, although from a distance in the initial production of my thesis, is thoroughly reflected in this manuscript. A special thanks to K. Scott Oliphint, James Anderson, Ralph Alan Smith, and my examiner Daniel J. Hill for their willingness to read my manuscript, and to offer insights as to how I might modify and/or better develop my main arguments. Second only to the Lord Himself, the author is thankful to his children Nicea, Chalcedon, and Augustine, and most of all to his wife Heather Bosserman for the many sacrifices that they have made on account of this project, and their unceasing faith that the Lord would bring it to completion.