But you use your senses to read the Bible!

A common objection fundamentalist Atheists will sometimes make after a presuppositionalist has shown that skeptical arguments from within the Atheist’s worldview sever the senses is usually stated O: “But you use your senses to read the Bible!” Let’s take a closer look at this objection and bring some clarity to why it fails.

Worldview A: “The Atheist Worldview.”
Worldview C: “The Christian Worldview.”
Conclusion X: “The senses fall to skeptical arguments.”
Objection O: “But you use your senses to read the Bible!”

The objection usually comes about when the Christian has taken on A for the sake of argument and shown through various skeptical arguments that X is the case when A is presupposed. Then the Atheist will exclaim O from within A against the Christian. Note that the Atheist has given his position regarding X away and admitted it is valid by trying to use it against the Christian who is arguing X from within A. This is an irrelevant objection because the Christian doesn’t hold to A, he holds to C. In fact the Atheist begs the question against the Christian because the Atheist hasn’t taken on C for the sake of the argument and shown why O would be the case.


4 Comments

Steve Wilkinson

But, what if we replace Worldview C with Worldview M “The Mormon Worldview” … Wouldn’t the same argument work, but with a false worldview replacing C? Is it only a defeater for A?

defectivebit

There is nothing unique to Christianity with this type of argumentation so yes, C can be replaced with any worldview that is (not)A. Now, realize that this mistake does not prove that C or M does not fall prey to X but demonstrates the irrelevance of O when fundamentalist Atheists simply assert it from A. The Atheist, in order to not beg the question, would need to demonstrate that X is the case given whatever worldview they are in making this objection against.

Mike

Only if you could show that the Mormon Worldview (M) could provide an adequate epistomology. For example, doesn’t M position the existance of many Gods? And so how do you know your revelation will provide an adequate epistomology? After all, maybe a God who who is even greater than the God who who provided the Mormon revelation will come along tomorrow and change everything. And so you are in the same position as the athiest.

defectivebit

In the overall scheme of the argument from C we could show on the basis of M, knowledge is destroyed in just as in A. A helpful post by C. L. Bolt is here: https://choosinghats.org/2010/06/covenantal-apologetics-and-other-religions/


Leave a Comment