Posted by
ValiantForTruth on Sunday, September 27, 2009 10:20:34 AM
If the way in which people reason and interpret evidence is determined by their presupposed worldviews, and if the worldviews of the believer and unbeliever are in principle completely at odds with each other, how can the disagreement between them over the justification of Biblical claims be resolved? It might seem that all rational argumentation is precluded since appeals to evidence and logic will be controlled by the respective, conflicting worldviews of the believer and unbeliever. However this is not the case.
Differing worldviews can be compared to each other in terms of the important philosophical question about the "preconditions of intelligibility" for such important assumptions as the universality of logical laws, the uniformity of nature, and the reality of moral absolutes. We can examine a worldview and ask whether its portrayal of nature, man and knowledge provide an outlook in terms of which logic, science and ethics can make sense.
For instance, it does not comport with the practices of natural science to believe that all events are random and unpredictable and that the world and what exists in it are the product of such events. It does not comport with the demand for honesty in scientific research, if no moral principle expresses anything but a personal preference or feeling. Moreover, if there are internal contradictions in a person's worldview, it does not provide the preconditions for making sense out of man's experience.
It is the Christian's contention that all non-Christian worldviews are beset with internal contradictions, as well as with beliefs which do not render logic, science or ethics intelligible. On the other hand, the Christian worldview, taken from God's self-revelation in Scripture, demands our intellectual commitment because it does provide the preconditions of intelligibility for man's reasoning, experience, and dignity.
In Biblical terms, because of the unbelievers rejection of God's revealed truth, they have "become vain in their reasonings" [Romans 1:21]. By means of their foolish perspective they end up "opposing themselves" [2 Tim. 2:25]. They follow a conception of knowledge which does not deserve the name [1 Tim. 6:20]. Their philosophy and presuppositions rob one of knowledge [Col. 2:3, 8], leaving them in ignorance [Eph. 4:17-18; Acts 17:23]. The aim of the Christian is to cast down their reasonings [2 Cor. 10:5] and to challenge them in the spirit of Paul: "Where is the wise? Where is the disputer of this world? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?" [1 Cor. 1:20].
In various forms, the fundamental argument is that the Christian worldview is true because of the impossibility of the contrary. When the perspective of God's revelation is rejected, then the unbeliever is left in foolish ignorance because his philosophy does not provide the preconditions of knowledge and meaningful experience. The proof that Biblical Christianity is true is that if it were not, we would not be able to prove anything, because there is no explanation for the laws of logic and antithesis outside the Biblical world view.
The need of the unbeliever is nothing less than a radical change of mind [Acts 17:30]. He needs to change his fundamental worldview and submit to the revelation of God in order for any knowledge or experience to make sense. He at the same time needs to repent of his spiritual rebellion and sin against God. Because of the condition of his heart, he cannot see the truth or know God in a saving fashion.
[credits to Greg Bahnsen's work on apologetics]