Consistently Reformed Apologetic
"Being" has been one of the thorns in the flesh of philosophy only because philosophy historically has dogmatically presupposed its own epistemological autonomy. Parmenides was no closer to a proper understanding of being than was Heraclitus. Aquinas was no closer than Hegel. Once one assumes any fact to be apart from God, that fact will never be truly known."Facts are unaccounted for if Scripture is left out of account.'" It is for this reason that Van Til's approach is seen as a worldview apologetic. Only in a consistently Reformed apologetic can we see not just "being" or "reason" or "evidence" or "cause" as inexplicable apart from God, but all "things" are inexplicable apart from the presupposition of the God of Scripture.