Presuppositional Aplogetics

[_Derek]

Is anyone familiar with this approach? I was wondering if anyone knew why it is practiced by Calvinists alomost exlusively (that I am aware of).

[Guest]

This is the type of apologetic that Gene Cook uses on his program, and many others do as well. A presuppositionist will say that we all presuppose something, even Atheists, so they don't think it's unfair to start with the assumption that the bible is true. I'm not sure how effective this tactic is but I don't presuppose the bible to be true. I'm convinced that it is, but that's my conclusion, not my starting point. The guys over at apologetics.com had a show on this a few months ago and made a good case for starting with a presupposition.

[_Derek]

I listened to Paul Manata, who is a Calvinist, debate Dan Barker the other night. He did a pretty good job and it appeared he was using this method.


Do you or anyone know why it is that so many Calvinist's use it? I have never heard it refered to by a non-Calvinist.

[Guest]

Derek,

I thought you might be interested in learning more about presuppositional apologetics, so I thought I'd drop you a compilative link that has many ariticles on the subject. Check it out.


http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/a ... etics.html


What is a presupposition? A presupposition is a ultimate assumption or foundational unquestioned principle which is or assumed to be true in the course of argument for the purpose of making other points. A presupposition is really an undergirding belief that precedes all other beliefs a person has; It is a belief that governs all our other beliefs or the most fundamental commitment of our heart and mind. Each person insists on some ultimate category of thought or conceptual framework which he must assume in order to make a sensible interpretation of reality. All of our arguments are ultimately settled only by appealing to the soundness of our first principles. Unbelievers start with the presupposition that man can be as God in the sense of being his own ultimate authority and erroneously believes he can do so successfully. For Christians we adopt the Word of God to evaluate all other beliefs, and must regard it with certainty. Reason must be the servant of Revelation (God’s Word). It is a view that places the Christian worldview and it’s basic assumptions over against the non-Christian worldview and basic assumptions! Presuppositionalism presents reason and evidences within a biblical framework.

[Guest]

Hello, everybody,

"Presuppositional apologetics," as described, sounds like a fancy name for being too lazy, too scared, and/or too ingenuous to attempt substantiating the undergirdings of one's belief.

Shalom,
Emmet

[Guest]

emmet wrote:

"Presuppositional apologetics," as described, sounds like a fancy name for being too lazy, too scared, and/or too ingenuous to attempt substantiating the undergirdings of one's belief.

i guess that's another way of saying that it's taking a big shortcut. i tend to agree with you here, although admittedly i did not take the time to read all the links mentioned.

SE quoted:

For Christians we adopt the Word of God to evaluate all other beliefs, and must regard it with certainty.

Emmett might respond that this statement is irresponsible or meaningless unless the Word of God is in fact the Word of God. in other words, you have to establish that before jumping to the conclusion of "regarding it with certainty." (of course emmett might respond quit differently

on the other hand, one has to accept some things as a "given" when arguing things like theology, or you would never get anywhere. we can't be 100% sure about everything. faith fills that gap.

TK

[Guest]

Hello, TK!

Quote:
For Christians we adopt the Word of God to evaluate all other beliefs, and must regard it with certainty.

Emmett might respond that this statement is irresponsible or meaningless unless the Word of God is in fact the Word of God. in other words, you have to establish that before jumping to the conclusion of "regarding it with certainty." (of course emmett might respond quit differently

Sounds good to me .

Shalom,
Emmet

[_Derek]

Hello, everybody,

"Presuppositional apologetics," as described, sounds like a fancy name for being too lazy, too scared, and/or too ingenuous to attempt substantiating the undergirdings of one's belief.

Shalom,
Emmet

I would suggest learning more about it bofore going here Emmet. Although I realize you did qualify your statement with "as described". Here is a link to some lectures by Greg Bahnsen who was taught by Cornilius Van Til. See the lecture called "Challenge to Unbelief". It's long (4-lectures) but well worth it!

Having studied the topic over the last month or so, I am convinced that it is anything but "lazy" or "scared". That's not to say I fully understand it. It cannont be understood in a month. And I am not prepared, having only recently began studying it to defend it. So I'll leave that to these guys!

While it may not mean much to you, being a non-Christian, but the men who subscribe to this methodology (especially Bahnsen) are some of the boldest, and smartest Christian men you could ask for. But hey, I realize that being bold and smart doesn't make your position true!

That's not to say I endorse everything taught by these men, or that I have even "figured it out" yet. It is quite complicated and sounds strange or too easy when condensed into a statement like the one above (not that I don't appreciate it!).

Anyway, it's a pretty amazing philosophy when studied. Extremely interesting at worst.

It deals often with the idea of being able to "give an account". They teach that the uniformity of nature, logic, morality, cannot be accounted for in especially an atheistic, but also any other worldview besides Christianity. It's sometimes know as TAG or the Transcendental Arugument for the Existence of God.

All Christians, it would seem to me, believe that these things cannot properly be given an acount for when not understood within the Christian worldview (if they do I don't see how they do).

Maybe some of you guys could check it out and let me know what you think.

I would also recommend a book called "Van Til's Apologetic, a Reading and Analysis" by Greg Bahnsen.

[_Derek]

Hi all,

Here is a better explanation of the presuppositional position than I could hope to offer.

http://www.frame-poythress.org/frame_ar ... tional.htm

[_Derek]

on the other hand, one has to accept some things as a "given" when arguing things like theology, or you would never get anywhere. we can't be 100% sure about everything.

I don't think you can be 100% sure about anything can you? Unless you are omniscient. Or you have been told by One who is. Espescially when dealing with anything absolute like logic, morality, etc...