Some pastoral questions have brought the disagreement between Van Til and Gordon Clark to mind. It isn’t so much the views of those men, but some problems I see emerging when reason is elevated above revelation.
This is one of the dangers of “Christian rationalism”. The mind subtly usurps the authority of Scripture, or special revelation. They wouldn’t admit to this (I think), but you see it when there is the denial of various doctrines because it does not make sense in light of other doctrines. They have a hard time reasoning these apparently opposite doctrines that are found in Scripture. Rather than submit their minds before Scripture, they make the Scriptures submit to their “rational” theology.
There are 2 doctrines in particular that have been problematic for many who espouse Clark’s views. They affirm the doctrine of election or predestination. This is the problem, so to speak. They have a difficult time with both common grace and the free offer of the gospel. These don’t doctrines don’t make “sense” in light of election, but our minds are not the measure of truth. Our theology is not to settle for “reasonable” but to reflect revelation.
Cavman Considers 