Recently I was reminded of at least three unthinking and sometimes even cult-like responses generally offered by so-called presuppositional apologists when their perceived method becomes the subject of criticism.
1. Hagiography – Defending the likes of Cornelius Van Til, Greg Bahnsen, and others to the death while dismissing any potentially valid critiques against their method(s) from Scripture or philosophy.
2. Enlightenment – Presuming an opponent or critic of their method(s) is ignorant of said method(s) because he or she ‘has not read Van Til or Bahnsen’ instead of dealing with the challenge brought against the method(s).
3. Semantics – Taking advantage of the often vague and ambiguous language of Van Til and Bahnsen in order to posture and prolong a discussion that is not going favorably for the presuppositionalist.