COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF G. H. CLARK'S AND C. VAN TIL'S RELIGIOUS-PHILOSOPHICAL PRESUPPOSITIONAL SYSTEMS

Introduction. The article contrasts the religious-philosophical views of the two major representatives of presuppositional apologetics: Gordon H. Clark and Cornelius Van Til. Content. The article examines the main differences in the related apologetic presuppositional systems created by G. H. Clark and K. Van Til. Existing English-language studies on the topic by G. Bansen and G. Crapton are taken into account. Similarities between the systems, existing due to their common presuppositional nature, are summarized. Differences in attitudes to positive proofs for the existence of God are considered. Discrepancies in views on the relationship between God's knowledge and man's knowledge and on logic as a discipline are taken into account. Peculiarities in the attitude to the role of epistemology in apologetics and in philosophy in general are analyzed. Conclusions. Clark's and Van Til's views bear a common presuppositional character. Clark's presuppositionism has a more pronounced character. Van Til did not deem presuppositionism to be the sole acceptable Christian type of apologetics, was more skeptical regarding the abilities of the human mind and gave less value to the role of epistemology.