(Note: This is a guest post written by Michael Coughlin who tweets here and blogs here. I am currently away and thank Michael for this guest post. If you have thoughts and questions, feel free to comment and when he has time he will respond.)
It is really wonderful that so many people are taking on a good biblical mindset and embracing the spirit and discipline of presuppositional apologetics. This blog is a prime example of Christians who desire to honor the Lord by always believing what He has revealed and then acting accordingly.
I want to address a trend which I have noticed. Allow me to introduce a phenomenon I hope will be nipped in the bud in Christianity. A Christian evangelist or apologist “C” embarks on a conversation with an atheist “A.” It may go something like this:
C: Do you go to church?
A: No, I’m an atheist. (More than likely it will include a statement such as “I’m too smart for church.”)
C: The Bible says that everyone has knowledge of God, since God has made it plain to all.
A: I don’t agree with that. I don’t believe in god.
C: Yes you do. I refuse to believe you. I believe God over you, every day, man.
A: Ok. Well, that’s great. But I’m standing here telling you I really don’t believe in God.
C: You know there is a God. I know you know it. Why won’t you admit you know it?
A: Why do you refuse believe that I really, truly don’t believe that I know there’s a God?
C: Because God has revealed Himself perfectly to you and written His laws on your heart so you know and are without excuse.
A: You sound very irrational. I just told you I don’t believe in god and you seem compelled to convince me I do. I’m going to walk away because you’re an idiot.
At this point, the Christian applauds himself for not entertaining the atheist’s worldview and applies 1 Corinthians 1 to the conversation: that the preaching of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing – thus justifying his own behavior.
Except what is the problem? The Christian never actually got around to the folly of preaching the cross! The Christian only tried to argue the other person into agreeing that the person really knows God.
Here is where some die-hard presuppers may jump in and say, “Yes! We honor God when we believe His Word and only use arguments he would use. We don’t kowtow to the professing atheists claims!”
But I say, and I do mean to do this gently and respectfully, that there may be a logic error experienced in this line of thinking.
Good presup is about believing what the Bible says about God and man and then acting accordingly. But I do not see any reason why that means we must get a professing atheist to admit they really know God. In fact, I think it is counter-Scriptural and, as the result, counter-productive. (All Scripture is inherently pragmatic, just not in the way sinful men want it to be, but that’s a different post).
Take a look at Romans 1 again. This is the GOTO presup text. No one is without excuse because God has made himself plain to them as you can see here.
Romans 1:19 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…
This is true. Now look back just one verse to verse 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
I submit to you that verses 19-21 are not a proof text for forcing someone to admit they know God, but rather a declaration of the condemnation of all men, regardless of the level of written revelation they’ve received.
And, if the would-be presupper read and believed verse 18, they would know that THIS PERSON CANNOT HELP BUT DENY GOD. You see, the effect we sometimes try to achieve is actually the opposite effect than ought to be expected. We want people to agree they know God, but we neglect the truth of verse 8 when we go to far into this argumentation. People know there’s a God, yes; but the fact is that we ought to expect them to DENY this emphatically – based on verse 18.
Think about it. Even if you met a non-atheist, let’s say a Hindu, Mormon, Catholic, Muslim, you name it – even if you met someone who affirmed the existence of a deity, are they really different from the atheist? Every one of them is suppressing the truth of the One True and Triune God. You see, even the tacit acknowledgement of a ‘god’ who is not Jesus is irrelevant. Let’s stop wasting our time and being irrational by trying to convince people they know there is a ‘god,’ and, instead, proclaim the God who is to them and let Him work out the consciousness of it with their soul.
And, if you look back just a couple verses in Romans to verses 16 and 17, I submit to you this is God’s plan. We are to proclaim the GOSPEL to them because it is the GOSPEL which IS the power to save them. They don’t need our pre-evangelism getting them to admit they know there is a God any more than they need a no-strings-attached-bbq invitation. What these God-deniers need is the only power that can actually change their hard hearts, the righteousness which is revealed by faith. And, inherent in gospel proclamation is the need to explain sin and the law to the person.
What is not required is for that person to humbly admit they know deep down inside there is a God to whom they are accountable. Even if they could, without the regenerating power of the gospel what ‘god’ would they fear they’ve offended anyway? My point is that even if a person agreed with you that they know in their heart and soul there is a god…where did that really get you? Most decent atheists would prefer to stick to their original position and argue anyway, rather than agree with you.
So, go forth, expect people to suppress the truth. Just expose the truth to them and let God do the work on their heart that only He can do. The work He proclaimed would be done through the means of ‘hearing.’ Give people the law of God, shining light on their dark hearts that they may tremble before the God they know and give them the words of life that gives them a solution to the darkness.
Blessings to all. I look forward to interacting if questions arise.
Heading soon to US but it will take days so won’t have another window to use internet but I thank you for holding down the fort!
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.
Thank you, Vincent.
You’re very welcome Michael!
In my experience, the atheist often leads with the “THERE IS NO GOD” argument because it is central for them. I’m happy to respond as Paul did “Of course there is (creation and conscience) and you know it. You just don’t want to admit it because you love your sin *insert Gospel here*.”
But, typically, the atheist WANTS to argue their central point and won’t consider yours until theirs is satisfied, and so most witnessing encounters either involve repeating the above a few different times in different ways or rabbit trailing into sometimes good side issues (objective morality, veracity of Scripture, etc) or sometimes worthless side issues (virgin birth, taxonomy of animals in the Bible, politics). I like to engage the worthwhile ones because I actually think that is a big part of their individual hangup, and use the dumb ones to go back to the Gospel.
Thanks for reading and commenting, Jason!
I have so been guilty of having the conversation you just described. And all it ended with was me feeling quite smug and some non believer thinking that I am a rock head.
Totally agree, we have to get beyond trying to convince them God exists and tell the the full Gospel of Jesus Christ. Let the Holy Spirit convict. We really, really like to get in the way with our own arguments.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment, Wally. I appreciate your honesty.
That is why I don’t really dabble in what some would call “apologetics.” I stink at it LOL. Now I just share the Gospel and folks can listen or not. I may stray now and then to argue a point, but I always go back. I will leave the apologetics to you theologians
🙂
Long live Cornelius Van Til – but it’s hard to work through this post.
“Don’t presup me’ bro”…
Just give me the Doctrines of Grace and don’t lose the simplicity of the Gospel (as Paul exhorted us 2,000 years ago.)
I’m sorry the post was hard to work through for you, Andrew. The point is that if you are truly presuppositional, you’ll give folks the gospel, rather then try to get them to stop suppressing the truth of their knowledge of God.
There’s a one sentence summary for you. Again, I’m sorry it wasn’t more clear!
Let Christ be all in all…
and let theology be Reformed !
Amen. Well said brother.
Thanks, brother.
[…] Click here to read the entire post. […]
I have one question. In your post you named Catholics. As a Catholic we do acknowledge One true God and Triune God. Other than that the post is entirely correct.
Thanks for reading. I don’t see a question, 🙂
I do appreciate you reading and commenting, though.
Thank you for the post Michael. I am going to revisit Romans 1 and dive into the exegesis of it.. It is a great chapter.
Thanks, brother for reading. I look forward to your post once you revisit!
[…] 4.) Bad Presup’: Guest Post by Michael Coughlin […]
Thanks for liking our podcast and great post on yours