Responding to Brian Bosse's Presuppositional Critique

Discussion in 'Apologetical Methods' started by Worddoer, Apr 27, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Worddoer

    Worddoer Puritan Board Freshman

    In his article criticizing presuppositional apologetics, Brian Bosse lays out three premises that Greg Bahnsen makes in defense of presuppositional apologetics but claims that these premises are not established in an objectively certain manner. As a student of presuppositional apologetics, as I would imagine a great many here are, I would like to share my perspective on this subject. I suppose I would respond to premise 1 in the following way:

    Premise 1: All non-Christian worldviews are worldviews based on human autonomy.

    Now, Brian says that this premise has not been established in an objectively certain manner. If we could support it with a sound deductive argument, I suppose it would then be supported in an objectively certain manner. Before I do that, I am wondering how anyone could claim that this premise is not based on a simple reading of Scripture.

    (1) A Worldview is either based on Christ or on Human autonomy
    (2) The Non-Christian worldview is not based on Christ
    (3) Therefore, the Non-Christian worldview is based on Human autonomy

    Keeping in mind that the presuppositionalist sees Scripture as his ultimate source of authority, while others may see the disjunct as invalid, a biblical Christian who understands Scripture's teaching concerning "The two ways" cannot take it as anything but a sound argument. The teaching of the two ways is mentioned throughout Scripture. The way of life and the way of death; the way of righteousness and the way of wickedness. It is precisely this biblical teaching that we have in mind when we say there are only two worldviews: Christian theism and the Non-Christian. Rather than list my thoughts regarding the last two premises that supposedly are not supported in an objectively certain manner, I would like to interact on this one first. Even though we may interact with philosophy on this question, that is no reason for us to forget or neglect fact that our apologetic comes from and is founded on Scripture top to bottom, beginning to end, through and through. Therefore, I would expect that anyone that would take up a contrary view point would reference Scripture for why this argument fails.
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2014
  2. Worddoer

    Worddoer Puritan Board Freshman

    A Worldview that is not based on Christ is based on human autonomy.
    The Non-Christian Worldview is not based on Christ.
    Therefore, the Non-Christian Worldview is based on human autonomy.

    A worldview that honors God is based on Christ
    The Non-Christian worldview does not honor God
    Therefore the Non-Christian worldview is not based on Christ

    Just in case someone did not prefer the disjunct, and just in case someone thinks that someone could have a worldview that somehow honors God while not being based on Christ.

    In addition, I would love to hear an example of a Non-Christian worldview that is not based on human autonomy, that is, that is not the product of finite human thought. Is such a thing remotely possible?
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2014
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page