Cornelius Van Til claimed that all traditional apologetic methodologies are flawed and that those Reformed Christians who use such methods are compromising their theology. His goal was to develop an apologetic method that is truly consistent with Reformed theology. Did he achieve that goal?

For almost a century, Reformed theologians, especially in North America, have debated this topic. The debate has often been acrimonious, with serious charges and counter-charges coming from both sides. This book seeks to take the debate in a more constructive direction by clearing away as much misunderstanding as possible in order that we might add to discussions of apologetic methods the actual practice of apologetics.

In Part One, Cornelius Van Til's own system of thought is set forth in a clear way in order that readers may know exactly what it entailed. His doctrine of God, creation, the fall, common grace, redemption, and the antithesis are explained in order that readers might understand the apologetic implications of these doctrines.

Part Two is devoted to explaining why many Reformed Christians have not embraced Van Til's apologetics in spite of its popularity and influence. These chapters outline biblical, philosophical, theological, historical, and practical concerns with Van Til's system of thought. What this book reveals is that Van Til's apologetic system of thought is consistent with neither Scripture nor Reformed theology.