Changes

[[Image:Bahnsen.jpg‎|thumb|150px|Dr. [[Greg Bahnsen]] became known as "the man [[atheism|atheists]] fear most" due to [[Michael Martin]]'s cancellation of their scheduled debate.<ref>[http://www.frame-poythress.org/frame_articles/Bahnsen.htm Bahsen at the Stein debate] by John Frame</ref>]]

[[Image:Bahnsen.jpg‎|thumb|150px|Dr. [[Greg Bahnsen]] became known as "the man [[atheism|atheists]] fear most" due to [[Michael Martin]]'s cancellation of their scheduled debate.<ref>[http://www.frame-poythress.org/frame_articles/Bahnsen.htm Bahsen at the Stein debate] by John Frame</ref>]]

[[Greg Bahnsen]] wrote about [[atheism and presuppositional apologetics]]:

[[Greg Bahnsen]] wrote about [[atheism and presuppositional apologetics]]:

{{Cquote|[[Presuppositional apologetics]] as taught by [[Cornelius Van Til]] urges the Christian to argue with unbelievers in an “indirect” fashion, doing an internal analysis of the unbeliever’s worldview (his fundamental assumptions about reality, knowledge, and ethics) and comparing it to the worldview revealed in the Bible. Many students of apologetics have come to see the strength of this apologetical challenge when it is applied to the various kinds of views advocated by atheists or materialists. Given the presuppositions of the atheist, he could not make sense out of adherence to the laws of logic (as I tried to show in my public debate with [[Gordon Stein]]), nor could he make sense out of the principles and procedures of science itself (as I tried to show in my public debate with [[Eddie Tabash|Edward Tabash]]). The atheist cannot give a rational account of the fundamental assumptions of ethics, either.1 Atheism is philosophically unable to argue ethically, scientifically, or logically against the Christian faith.<ref>[https://answersingenesis.org/apologetics/presuppositional-reasoning-with-false-faiths/ Presuppositional Reasoning with False Faiths] by Dr. Greg L. Bahnsen  on April 8, 2009</ref>}}

{{Cquote|[[Presuppositional apologetics]] as taught by [[Cornelius Van Til]] urges the Christian to argue with unbelievers in an “indirect” fashion, doing an internal analysis of the unbeliever’s worldview (his fundamental assumptions about reality, knowledge, and ethics) and comparing it to the worldview revealed in the Bible. Many students of apologetics have come to see the strength of this apologetical challenge when it is applied to the various kinds of views advocated by atheists or materialists. Given the presuppositions of the atheist, he could not make sense out of adherence to the laws of logic (as I tried to show in my public debate with [[Gordon Stein]]), nor could he make sense out of the principles and procedures of science itself (as I tried to show in my public debate with [[Eddie Tabash|Edward Tabash]]). The atheist cannot give a rational account of the fundamental assumptions of ethics, either. Atheism is philosophically unable to argue ethically, scientifically, or logically against the Christian faith.<ref>[https://answersingenesis.org/apologetics/presuppositional-reasoning-with-false-faiths/ Presuppositional Reasoning with False Faiths] by Dr. Greg L. Bahnsen  on April 8, 2009</ref>}}

== See also ==

== See also ==