Establish the need: How do we give evidence as a Presuppositionalist?
Purpose: We will consider four points concerning giving evidence presuppositionally.
- There are no brute facts
- Why presuppositions matters
- Examples in action: Intelligent Design
- Presuppositionalist’s way of giving evidence
There are no brute facts
No one has a blank slate in their mind when they approach the world.
- They still retain certain things they believed in, even when they attempt to be skeptical of everything.
- The ultimate skeptic who doubts everything still does not doubt he exists or other things exists (water, food, the reality of sleep, etc) for long.
Since there is no neutrality, all facts are interpreted by one’s world view.
- Recall session two is on the impossibility of neutrality.
- Example: The Duo-Duel of the American vs. Soviet Union car race[1]
- Soviet Newspaper headlines: “USSR 2nd Place, USA second to last!”
- American Newspaper: “USA #1! USSR last place!”
- Notice: Both claims are true. But they are not neutrally interpreted.
Why presuppositions matters
Why Presuppositions #1: The presupposition (the things one ultimately believes) are important because they determine what is evidence
- Various types of presuppositions determine what can or cannot be evidence
- For example your theory of knowledge (epistemology) assume whether consciously or subconsciously certain criteria of what would constitute something as evidence.
- In other words, there is a ‘checklist’ that needs to be fulfilled before something is determined as ‘evidence’
Why Presuppositions #2:People can have bad presuppositions and criteria of evidence
- Why give evidence, if their criteria reject Christian evidences already?
- THEREFORE: Christians in apologetics ought to refute bad presuppositions.
- Are they self-refuting?
- With their bad presuppositions, are their necessary things in reality (morality, logic, etc) that their presuppositions would end up denying?
Why Presuppositions #3: People can have good presuppositions and criteria of evidence
- If their criteria of what is evidence and presuppositions are good, yet when the evidence is given and they reject it, we must hold them accountable and show they have no excuse to reject Christian truths.
- THEREFORE: Press them to accept it. If they refuse, expose their unwillingness to believe in Jesus not because of evidence, but because of their sinful will which is also irrational.
Examples in action: Intelligent Design
Often Christians are fast to give evidences for design.
But the objection from nonbelievers is: “Everything is just by chance! That’s nice but…it’s by random processes!”
It can get frustrating where no matter how much evidence and details Christians give, the atheist still reject design.
But atheists actually think things do look design; they just rule it out its not designed because of their presuppositional commitment:
- Atheist Francis Crick: “Biologist must keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved”[2]
- Richard Lewontin: “Organisms appear to have been carefully and artfully designed.” Richard C. Lewontin, “Adaptation,” Scientific American, and Scientific American book Evolution (September 1978).
Presuppositionalist’s way of giving evidence
There are two acronym to remember when you apply what is taught here: DELL and RIP
First is D.E.L.L (Define, Example, List; Let it rip)
- First step, you want to find out the unbelievers’ presuppositions with regards to evidence.
- So you have the person Define their terms, give Examples and List their criteria) so you can Let it rip into their worldview.
After applying DELL, you then R.I.P (Refute, If not, Press)
- If the presuppositions are bad, REFUTE them; if their criteria of evidence is good but they reject the conclusion anyways, PRESS them on it by exposing their inconsistencies (why do they accept their examples but not mine of what constitute as evidence based on the criteria?)
- You can remember this thinking of RIPPING up a bad argument.
Example: Design
- Have the atheist give:
- Definition of design
- Examples of design
- List the criteria of what is design
- Definitions are important as to expose any effort of ruling out the Christian positions by default.
- Examples are important so as to compare your example of design to their examples and showing that they are similar.
- Listing the criteria is important because they provide a checklist clearly stated of what are evidences of design.
- Possible criteria:
- Irreducible Complexity
- Order
- Purpose
- Complexity
- Beauty
- Information
- If the definition, criteria and examples are already messed up: Refute their criteria of evidence
- If not and it turns out that the definition, criteria and examples are good from the skeptic: Present and Press the evidence
- Give a logical presentation of what you have to say.
- Make sure facts are accurate.
- What if they do not accept it? Press them on their inconsistency and double standard of why they reject your evidence of design when by the right criteria they acknowledged, they even gave you examples of design.
[1] This illustration is from Christian writer and Presuppositional Apologist Gary DeMar.
[2] Francis Crick, What Mad Pursuit, (New York, New York: Basic Books, 1990), 138.
This is very helpful brother. It is easy to follow.
Reblogged this on clydeherrin.
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.
Thank you.
Thank you Mark for reading this
Good point emphasizing that there are no brute facts. Also good description of the way to give evidence. Since there are no brute facts one has to go through the DELL and RIP methods to keep the presuppositions in view.
Thanks for reading this and observing the acronym DeLL and RIP; grateful for you brother!
Reblogged this on My Logos Word.
The brute facts example is fantastic. You put so much time into explaining this in common terms, thank you for that!!!!!!
Aww thanks! How are you feeling sister???? Doctors said anything???
I am doing better praise the Lord! I have been prepping for Saturday. The resurrection is just so important to our faith and I really want the youth to love Jesus more because of it!
Aww thank you for your prep; should my wife email youth saying it’s “I am the Resurrection” for this Sunday, is that accurate?
Yes please!!!!!
Shared this to TCWP
Wow thank you so much Jeff!
Thanks for helping us think in terms of presupposition/world view rather than arguing evidence/facts. It’s like a knee jerk reaction to just discuss/argue facts with an unbeliever rather than taking a step back and observing they’re arguing from a basis that doesn’t correspond with their supposed world view.
Thanks for reading this! Yes we must not be naive with presenting evidence to nonbelievers. Will there be more cleaning today like yesterday?
Today’s supposed to be another “rest day” prior to the weekend toil, but my wife wants me to insert some paver sand into the crevices separating the patio concrete slabs. That shouldn’t take too long.
How does your Thursday look?
Those principles in acronym form makes it memorable. It seems like an intelligent way to give evidence
[…] 6.) Apologetics Session 11: How to Give Evidence Presuppositionally […]
Wow I always wonder how a Presuppositionalist would give evidence and I think the principles here are consistent with worldview apologetics
Its great seeing a presuppositional way of setting forth Christian evidences
Even non-presuppositionalists would benefit from wise marshalling of evidences
Quite an insightful read, I must say. Gets to the heart of the problem Too.
But All in God’s purpose, not in human’s will
[…] Apologetics Session 11: How to Give Evidence Presuppositionally […]
merci beaucoup! I’ve often said that if a person never heard the gospel, never saw a Bible, but just looked all around at nature, he would know God. His presence is everywhere from the mountains and oceans to the flowers and trees. This earth was decorated by a master designer.
This is a great way to give evidence even Evidentialists should consider this strategy
[…] For those who are interested I have blog about this topic before: A Proposal on the Occasion and the Method of Presenting Evidence within a Van Tillian Framework, Presuppositional Apologetics Believes in Roles of Evidence: Yet Five Ways its Different than Evidentialism and Apologetics Session 11: How to Give Evidence Presuppositionally […]