No Neutral Ground
At the end of the last installment, I posited that there is an antithesis between the believer and the unbeliever. This is due to the unbeliever’s willingness to suppress the truth in unrighteousness as seen in Romans 1:18-22.
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools. (ESV)
Before we continue further, I would like to acquaint those readers not familiar with a somewhat technical term. That term would be epistemology. In short, epistemology means a theory of knowledge, or how we know what we know. By what means do we perceive reality.
Each person has what is called an epistemological starting point. What that person uses to measure and judge reality by. The following are a couple of examples.
Christian epistemological starting point:
God, general revelation
The Holy Bible, special revelation
Atheistic epistemological starting point:
Perception through the five (5) senses, empiricism
Scientific method, scientism
As a side note, Islam also accepts empiricism and the Quran. Hinduism holds that the world is an illusion (Maya) everything is God (Brahman) and there are no distinctions. For our purposes here, we will deal mainly with atheistic naturalism with the other systems to be addressed at a later time.
We all have our starting points. Given the Christian starts with God and the Holy Bible as their standard, and the unbeliever with a different standard, i.e. empiricism… There is no neutral ground!
The atheist will reason from their senses. The Muslim will reason from the Quran. The Hindu (or New Ager) will reason from Maya and Brahman.
…And the Christian should reason from God and the Holy Bible.
Christians will often attempt to reason to God and the Bible from the starting point of the unbeliever. They seek to establish some sort of common ground. This is a mistake. When we do this, it places us in a weakened position. We insert ourselves into the unbelievers’ matrix where we can ultimately end up trapped. Reasoning from unchristian presuppositions severely incapacitates us and allows the unbeliever to become the driver of the vehicle.
Why?
This is because the unbeliever will have rescuing devices when they are presented with evidence regarding God and the truth of Christianity. At the outset, the unbeliever will hold the presupposition there is no God and Christianity cannot, and is not true. So when presented with certain proofs, such as the argument from design or the cosmological argument, they will not accept it regardless of any evidence to the contrary. This will be done because God is not allowed to exist within their worldview. Questions that are without a solution for them will be relegated to the file of “One day science will have an answer.”
...So how shall a Christian attempt to reason with an unbeliever?
First, let us examine the concept of a worldview. A worldview, like epistemology, is held by everyone. In actuality, epistemology makes up one-third of a person’s worldview. The remaining two-thirds are metaphysics (The nature of reality) and ethics (morality, what is right and wrong). Each worldview seeks to provide an answer to these three concepts and make application of the same. An atheist will hold to an empirical/naturalistic worldview and will seek to provide answers to the above concepts according to their presuppositions. (I.e. there is no God, the stories in the Bible are untrue, the universe is just matter in motion, true knowledge is gained by our senses, and morality is dictated by society)
Likewise, the Christian will hold to a Biblical worldview and will provide answers to the above concepts according to their presuppositions. (I.e. there is an Almighty God, He has revealed Himself in nature and in His written word, our ability to sense and reason is due to his grace and our being created in His image, morality is dictated by God and is a reflection of His nature)
A worldview acts somewhat like a pair of glasses, which an individual will look through to see the world.
Now continuing on, let us look at Proverbs 26:4,
Answer not a fool according to his folly,
lest you be like him yourself. (ESV)
Again, we do not want to assume for ourselves the unbelievers worldview, and attempt to reason to God or His holy Word from that inferior standpoint. In doing so, we become fools ourselves. This would include attempting to reason with unbelievers using evidences or proofs, science, and what has been termed classical apologetics. Depending upon each individual, an unbeliever may be honest or dishonest with regards to proofs. Some will give the impression they just haven’t been provided with enough evidence. This is merely a deceitful and softer way of being dismissive. In reality, they do not wish to be convinced, but only desire to remain in their unbelief. However, others will be straightforward with an outright denial that any proof even exists. These persons will usually be vitriolic and insulting towards God and the Christian faith.
All this is not to say that evidences are without a use. They do, in fact, edify and strengthen the Christian in their faith. However, that is where they need to remain, within the Christian family and not used in an attempt to convince the unbeliever of the truth.
Now let us examine the immediate verse following, Proverbs 26:5,
Answer a fool according to his folly,
lest he be wise in his own eyes. (ESV)
The first time I saw these two verses, I was confused. It was not until I learned about presuppositionalism that I understood what it meant.
How shall we answer the fool (unbeliever) according to his folly…?
The answer is:
Do an internal critique of his worldview.
Show them what the repercussions are, and point out the logical conclusions given if the presuppositions of their worldview is followed out.
Expose the failures of their worldview as to its arbitrariness, inconsistency, and inability to provide for the preconditions of intelligibility (ability to make sense).
Paul stated in Colossians 2:8,
See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirit of the world, and not according to Christ. (ESV)
And in Colossians 2:2-3,
that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God's mystery, which is Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. (ESV)
Jesus said in John 14:6,
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (ESV)
So, in essence we have seen:
The believer and the unbeliever each have separate epistemologies and worldviews, this in turn contributes to the existing antithesis.
Due to this antithesis, there is no neutral ground.
The Christian should not give up his Bible and attempt to reason from the unbelievers starting point. In so doing he loses his sword and greatest weapon.
The Christian should do an internal critique of the unbeliever’s worldview, and show the obvious deficiencies with regards to arbitrariness, inconsistency, and the inability to provide for the preconditions of intelligibility.
No doubt the unbeliever will cry foul and say we cannot just assume Gods existence and the validity of the Bible. He will accuse us of being unfair, irrational and without reason.
…However, he himself assumes his own presuppositions. It might interest you to see who is actually unfair, irrational, and without reason.
In the next installment, we will examine and critique the unbeliever’s worldview in depth. We will also continue utilizing John Lennon’s song “Imagine” as the basis for the same.
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools. (ESV)
Before we continue further, I would like to acquaint those readers not familiar with a somewhat technical term. That term would be epistemology. In short, epistemology means a theory of knowledge, or how we know what we know. By what means do we perceive reality.
Each person has what is called an epistemological starting point. What that person uses to measure and judge reality by. The following are a couple of examples.
Christian epistemological starting point:
God, general revelation
The Holy Bible, special revelation
Atheistic epistemological starting point:
Perception through the five (5) senses, empiricism
Scientific method, scientism
As a side note, Islam also accepts empiricism and the Quran. Hinduism holds that the world is an illusion (Maya) everything is God (Brahman) and there are no distinctions. For our purposes here, we will deal mainly with atheistic naturalism with the other systems to be addressed at a later time.
We all have our starting points. Given the Christian starts with God and the Holy Bible as their standard, and the unbeliever with a different standard, i.e. empiricism… There is no neutral ground!
The atheist will reason from their senses. The Muslim will reason from the Quran. The Hindu (or New Ager) will reason from Maya and Brahman.
…And the Christian should reason from God and the Holy Bible.
Christians will often attempt to reason to God and the Bible from the starting point of the unbeliever. They seek to establish some sort of common ground. This is a mistake. When we do this, it places us in a weakened position. We insert ourselves into the unbelievers’ matrix where we can ultimately end up trapped. Reasoning from unchristian presuppositions severely incapacitates us and allows the unbeliever to become the driver of the vehicle.
Why?
This is because the unbeliever will have rescuing devices when they are presented with evidence regarding God and the truth of Christianity. At the outset, the unbeliever will hold the presupposition there is no God and Christianity cannot, and is not true. So when presented with certain proofs, such as the argument from design or the cosmological argument, they will not accept it regardless of any evidence to the contrary. This will be done because God is not allowed to exist within their worldview. Questions that are without a solution for them will be relegated to the file of “One day science will have an answer.”
...So how shall a Christian attempt to reason with an unbeliever?
First, let us examine the concept of a worldview. A worldview, like epistemology, is held by everyone. In actuality, epistemology makes up one-third of a person’s worldview. The remaining two-thirds are metaphysics (The nature of reality) and ethics (morality, what is right and wrong). Each worldview seeks to provide an answer to these three concepts and make application of the same. An atheist will hold to an empirical/naturalistic worldview and will seek to provide answers to the above concepts according to their presuppositions. (I.e. there is no God, the stories in the Bible are untrue, the universe is just matter in motion, true knowledge is gained by our senses, and morality is dictated by society)
Likewise, the Christian will hold to a Biblical worldview and will provide answers to the above concepts according to their presuppositions. (I.e. there is an Almighty God, He has revealed Himself in nature and in His written word, our ability to sense and reason is due to his grace and our being created in His image, morality is dictated by God and is a reflection of His nature)
A worldview acts somewhat like a pair of glasses, which an individual will look through to see the world.
Now continuing on, let us look at Proverbs 26:4,
Answer not a fool according to his folly,
lest you be like him yourself. (ESV)
Again, we do not want to assume for ourselves the unbelievers worldview, and attempt to reason to God or His holy Word from that inferior standpoint. In doing so, we become fools ourselves. This would include attempting to reason with unbelievers using evidences or proofs, science, and what has been termed classical apologetics. Depending upon each individual, an unbeliever may be honest or dishonest with regards to proofs. Some will give the impression they just haven’t been provided with enough evidence. This is merely a deceitful and softer way of being dismissive. In reality, they do not wish to be convinced, but only desire to remain in their unbelief. However, others will be straightforward with an outright denial that any proof even exists. These persons will usually be vitriolic and insulting towards God and the Christian faith.
All this is not to say that evidences are without a use. They do, in fact, edify and strengthen the Christian in their faith. However, that is where they need to remain, within the Christian family and not used in an attempt to convince the unbeliever of the truth.
Now let us examine the immediate verse following, Proverbs 26:5,
Answer a fool according to his folly,
lest he be wise in his own eyes. (ESV)
The first time I saw these two verses, I was confused. It was not until I learned about presuppositionalism that I understood what it meant.
How shall we answer the fool (unbeliever) according to his folly…?
The answer is:
Do an internal critique of his worldview.
Show them what the repercussions are, and point out the logical conclusions given if the presuppositions of their worldview is followed out.
Expose the failures of their worldview as to its arbitrariness, inconsistency, and inability to provide for the preconditions of intelligibility (ability to make sense).
Paul stated in Colossians 2:8,
See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirit of the world, and not according to Christ. (ESV)
And in Colossians 2:2-3,
that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God's mystery, which is Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. (ESV)
Jesus said in John 14:6,
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (ESV)
So, in essence we have seen:
The believer and the unbeliever each have separate epistemologies and worldviews, this in turn contributes to the existing antithesis.
Due to this antithesis, there is no neutral ground.
The Christian should not give up his Bible and attempt to reason from the unbelievers starting point. In so doing he loses his sword and greatest weapon.
The Christian should do an internal critique of the unbeliever’s worldview, and show the obvious deficiencies with regards to arbitrariness, inconsistency, and the inability to provide for the preconditions of intelligibility.
No doubt the unbeliever will cry foul and say we cannot just assume Gods existence and the validity of the Bible. He will accuse us of being unfair, irrational and without reason.
…However, he himself assumes his own presuppositions. It might interest you to see who is actually unfair, irrational, and without reason.
In the next installment, we will examine and critique the unbeliever’s worldview in depth. We will also continue utilizing John Lennon’s song “Imagine” as the basis for the same.