Language Games Podcast

In this final episode on whether John Frame is a Van Tillian, we discuss Frame’s views on traditional evidential arguments and how he understands the circularity of Van Til’s apologetic.

This is the second episode of a three-part series on whether John Frame is a Van Tillian. Today, we show that Frame is not a Van Tillian.

This is the first episode of a three-part series on whether John Frame is a Van Tillian. Today, we lay out what the real issue is in this discussion.

This is the second episode of a two-part series on refuting evidential apologetics. Today, we prove that all evidential arguments fail in their demonstration.

This is the first episode of a two-part series on refuting evidential apologetics. Today, we work through how to refute some of the more popular evidential arguments.

In this final episode of the series, we discuss whether Van Til’s apologetic is necessarily a Reformed apologetic.

In this episode we refute Richard Howe’s ontology-vs-epistemology objection against Van Til’s apologetic.

In this episode we work through what it means for Van Til’s apologetic to utilize presuppositions, transcendentals, and meta-assumptions.

In this episode we discuss why Van Til’s apologetic is a truth-directed transcendental argument.

In this episode we spend most of our time discussing why Van Til’s apologetic is a deductive argument.