Cornelius Van Til’s Doctrine of God and Its Relevance for Contemporary Hermeneutics Item Type Thesis or dissertation Authors Hunt, Jason B. Citation Hunt, J. B. (2017). Cornelius Van Til’s doctrine of God and its relevance for contemporary hermeneutics (Doctoral dissertation). University of Chester, United Kingdom. Publisher University of Chester Download date 27/09/2021 01:30:39 Item License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10034/620466 i Cornelius Van Til’s Doctrine of God and Its Relevance for Contemporary Hermeneutics Jason Bennett Hunt Submitted to University of Chester in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Chester March 2017 ii Cornelius Van Til’s Doctrine of God and Its Relevance for Contemporary Hermeneutics Jason Bennett Hunt Abstract Cornelius Van Til is known for his work in the field of apologetics. His distinctive approach emphasized consistency between methodology and theology in order to defend the Christian faith. Though often neglected, his doctrine of God provided the foundation for his methodology. The nature of who God is informs how we know him and how we interpret his word. The three most prominent contours of his doctrine were: the Creator-creature distinction, incomprehensibility, and the ontological Trinity. The value of these particular emphases is that they are key touchpoints for diagnosing apologetic methods and affirming the Christian system of truth. The nature of his assessment of methodology at the worldview level along these contours has wide-ranging implications for other disciplines, including hermeneutics. The following study explores the relevance of Van Til’s doctrine of God for contemporary biblical hermeneutics in terms of consistency between method and theology proper as revealed in the Bible. Van Til’s doctrine of God is relevant for contemporary hermeneutics both, in how ‘hermeneutics’ has come to be defined and in terms of how its relationship to metaphysics has been understood. In the former, there has been movement toward a more explicitly holistic definition, one that provides a general theory of understanding involving worldview assumptions. In the latter, the relationship between hermeneutics and metaphysics has been unavoidable. It has also been unstable and inconsistent. Van Til speaks to each of these trends from a self-conscious, Christian worldview. His work focused on worldview considerations and presuppositions, including metaphysical and epistemological concerns. It is argued that Van Til’s contributions are not only relevant for evaluating hermeneutical methods, but also contribute to some concerns of recent developments in the field. Two such developments which have influenced evangelical hermeneutics are Speech Act Theory (SAT) and Theological Interpretation of Scripture (TIS). Van Til’s contributions strengthen the effort to give due consideration to the divine author in discussions of meaning and method, but also serve to help critically evaluate and round out both. Lastly, the relevance of his theology proper is seen regarding the contemporary hermeneutical issue of the NT use of the OT. This provides a brief case study concerning a prominent contemporary issue in evangelical hermeneutics. Van Til’s contribution asks deeper questions regarding method and meaning which further the discussion, and detects flaws in some attempts to make sense of how the NT uses the OT. iii Summary of Portfolio Cornelius Van Til is somewhat of a controversial figure in reformed theology. Beyond the reformed world, he is virtually unknown and often misunderstood. That said, he was a proponent of the presuppositional school of apologetics. Treatment of his work has largely focused on his apologetic methodology in particular. However, by his own admission, his methodology is merely an extension of his theology, especially his doctrine of God. This point has often been overlooked. Van Til sought consistency between method and theology. Among his contemporaries (even those in the reformed tradition), he saw what amounted to inconsistency between theology and method, which he sought to remedy by asserting certain emphases in his doctrine of God. These emphases (Creator-creature distinction, incomprehensibility, and ontological Trinity) were creatively summarized by Van Til to provide a fitting defense against certain strains of thought that had crept into apologetic methods which were inconsistent with reformed theology. Many of those who followed Van Til’s general approach have sought to clarify and develop it in the field of apologetics. However, the application of his thought in other spheres has often been merely implicit and cursory. Yet, due to his emphasis on foundational philosophical categories (metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics), it would seem that his work has a much broader relevance than what has been explored in the past. In light of contemporary hermeneutical issues within evangelicalism and influences from without, it would seem fruitful to seek the same level of consistency that Van Til pursued in the field of hermeneutics. Van Til’s doctrine of God may help to contribute to, critique, and clarify the dialogue at the presuppositional level. For Van Til, apologetic methodology should be consistent with the theology it seeks to defend. An important extension of that principle is that hermeneutical methodology should also be consistent with theology—especially regarding the doctrine of God. His creatively summarized emphases in theology proper may also prove to be fit for the task of defending the Christian system of truth and exposing strains of thought that have crept into evangelical hermeneutics which are inconsistent with Christian theology. iv Declaration Statement This work has not previously been accepted in substance for any degree and is not being concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree. Signed Date This dissertation is being submitted in partial fulfillment for the degree of: PhD Signed Date This work is the result of my own independent investigation, except where otherwise stated. Other sources are acknowledged by footnotes giving explicit references. A bibliography is appended. Signed Dated I hereby give consent for my work, if accepted, to be available for photocopying and for inter- library loan, and for the title and summary to be made available to outside organizations. Signed Date v Acknowledgements Dedicated to my wife, Laura, for her encouragement and loving support throughout this journey. My parents, Charles and Karen Hunt, for the encouragement and support to pursue what the Lord has called me to do in this life. In memory of Cornelius Van Til (1895-1987) vi Contents Preface…………………………………………………………………………1-3 Part One: What Does Van Til Have to Do With Hermeneutics? Chapter One: Introduction…………………………………………………...4-51 Chapter Two: Surveying the Field, Part I……………………………...52-77 Chapter Three: Surveying the Field, Part II............................................78-127 Part Two: Van Til’s Doctrine of God Chapter Four: Creator-creature Distinction……………………..........128-163 Chapter Five: Incomprehensibility……………………………….........164-194 Chapter Six: Ontological Trinity………………………………………195-225 Part Three: Van Til’s Doctrine of God Applied Chapter Seven: The NT Use of the OT…………………………………226-257 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………...258-264 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………...265-303 vii "From where, then, does wisdom come? And where is the place of understanding? It is hidden from the eyes of all living and concealed from the birds of the air. Abaddon and Death say, 'We have heard a rumor of it with our ears.' "God understands the way to it, and he knows its place. For he looks to the ends of the earth and sees everything under the heavens. When he gave to the wind its weight and apportioned the waters by measure, when he made a decree for the rain and a way for the lightning of the thunder, then he saw it and declared it; he established it, and searched it out. And he said to man, 'Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom, and to turn away from evil is understanding.'" Job 28:20-28 Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered. Proverbs 28:26 1 Preface: Cornelius Van Til & Hermeneutics Cornelius Van Til (1895-1987) was a theologian and apologist who served on the faculty of Westminster Theological Seminary (1928-1972). He was, apart from Calvin, strongly influenced by the Dutch reformed tradition (Kuyper, Bavinck, and Vos). However, he was also controversial in the sense that he wrote polemically, and he creatively summarized reformed doctrines in new ways to meet the challenges of his day. This led to a strong polarization among those who interacted with his work, both positively1 and negatively.2 This was, in part, due to his interaction with philosophy and borrowing philosophical concepts, which he redefined according to the Christian worldview. His ideas have often been misunderstood and even misapplied.3 Yet, he saw his own work as merely presenting and applying ‘generic Calvinism,’ and confronting opposition to Christ and his church.4 Perhaps his most significant contribution to the field of apologetics was his self- conscious determination to construct a biblical, full-orbed Christian worldview, which did not merely focus on proximate arguments, but ultimate commitments. He sought to present a Christian system of truth in terms of metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics. Moreover, he saw a great need to evaluate apologetic methodology in order to discern whether one’s method was consistent with this system of truth. Underlying his apologetic method and worldview was a 1 Wesley A. Roberts, “Cornelius Van Til,” in Dutch Reformed Theology (ed. David F. Wells; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1989), 73; John M. Frame, Cornelius Van Til: An Analysis of His Thought (Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R Publishing, 1995), 44; John R. Muether, Cornelius Van Til: Reformed Apologist and Churchman (Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R Publishing, 2008), 16. 2 John Robbins, Cornelius Van Til: The Man and the Myth (Jefferson, Md.: Trinity Foundation, 1986); Gordon R.