# Recommended books to defend my faith with "the thinker"



## Ne Oublie (Jan 19, 2010)

I work with a gentleman at work. He is because he thinks he is. Although this is not for certain, but with a great probability.

He is quite versed in Philosophy and its proprietors names, places, and economies. He claims I am credulous.

I have had many conversations with "the thinker" (not saying to be obtuse, but factual.) He has retained and obtained much
through university and has proclaimed to me that he believes in a God, which he knows because of personal revelation. He is the mixed pot of philosophical thought, used to be a "creationist/believer", now calls them liars, and says that "Faith is an abomination of the Lord".

I would like to continue my conversations with him, plant seeds of the truth and pray that God would save him from his debased mind. Any books or recommendations that would help me, I would greatly appreciate. 

I do not think he has been challenged by a believer before, and I know that his soul is of the matter, and I know the Word of God
does not return void. Good counsel on how my heart and mind shall be in this matter would also be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Zenas (Jan 19, 2010)

For want of a book to suggest, I would challege his relativistic and subjective presumptions. Push him to rely on an objective truth and expand from there, forcing him to acknowledge or deny God's existence as He has revealed it. 

Are you familiar with presuppositional apologetics?


----------



## Ne Oublie (Jan 19, 2010)

Zenas said:


> For want of a book to suggest, I would challege his relativistic and subjective presumptions. Push him to rely on an objective truth and expand from there, forcing him to acknowledge or deny God's existence as He has revealed it.
> 
> Are you familiar with presuppositional apologetics?



I have pushed him on objective truth but he insists that truth and facts are synonymous. Facts are only things we are certain of, like 2 + 2 - 4. He also scoots
around relativism and subjectivity by saying that there are facts in general and then personal assumptions or conclusions based on the best possible answer based on the
knowledge that the person has. 

I am only familiar with Presuppositional Apologetics in name and idea. I also hear quite a bit about Van Til, Bahnsen, Clark. But they seem above my pay grade.(ha!)
If I must hurt my brain for this, I would prefer to use a hammer as to an ice pick. I have the "Defending the Faith" DVD by Bahnsen and it seems very good. But what do I know?(another, ha!)

And besides its just me and my Bible....(all in fun, but these are the ad hom's I am facing.)


----------



## Zenas (Jan 19, 2010)

You didn't push him far enough. When he says that facts are certain, ask him how he knows this. Ask him why personal asumptions are de facto based on the best possible answer someone has. In using such a definition, he has wholesale written off self-deception; a type of deception evident from observation and a verifiable objective truth, based on his own definition. 

When deconstructing someone's worldview, do not be satisfied with an answer that assumes a definition. Make them define their defining terms. Find out what they are relying on in order to support their worldview. I have found few people have ever contemplated this, and I have had to explain to people that I am not being obtuse or polemic, but rather trying to understand how and why they assume something or find something to be true. Where do they get their definitions for what truth and morality are and what do they rely on in order to come to those conclusions? Forcing these issues causes them to question the fundamentals of their presumptions and define terms that they normally assume without explaination. In so assuming, they are usually "borrowing" from Christianity in order to deny Christianity.


----------



## tommyb (Jan 19, 2010)

Ne Oublie said:


> I work with a gentleman at work. He is because he thinks he is. Although this is not for certain, but with a great probability.
> 
> He is quite versed in Philosophy and its proprietors names, places, and economies. He claims I am credulous.
> 
> ...



I would suggest "Reasonable Faith" by William Lane Craig. It's not presuppositional but about the best apologetic presentation of evidential metaphysics out there. Also, Francis Schaeffer. Start with "How shall we then live" (his most accessable) and if you like that get the "Francis Schaeffer Trilogy". Excellent presentation of apologetic philosophy.


----------



## Ne Oublie (Jan 19, 2010)

I would say that I believe I have gone to a degree of these levels with him and had him define the terms he is using. It seems either that he does not accept what I am saying, or I am not saying what I think I am saying, as he quickly dismisses what I am saying. I am assuming both, which is why I would like to better my language and processes for I know I am limited.

He also made mention that we put trust in things that we have evidence from, all with high percentage probabilities as with things like chairs and brakes on a car. And that trust is not faith, as faith is not based on high percentage probabilities. He then asked "who puts trust in things that are not probable by evidence from knowledge that can be seen?" 
I replied that He did. As he cannot count out the probability of human error and deception. In which he agreed, saying this is why we can only trust facts. Ah, but the circles of uncertainty can go no further but around and around! To him most things are not facts so therefore uncertainty. I made mention of this and asked how he could be so certain of what he was telling me, and he said the gathering of facts. Another circle of uncertainty. 

by the way...Thank you, Andrew for your help with this...


----------



## TeachingTulip (Jan 19, 2010)

Ne Oublie said:


> I work with a gentleman at work. He is because he thinks he is. Although this is not for certain, but with a great probability.
> 
> He is quite versed in Philosophy and its proprietors names, places, and economies. He claims I am credulous.
> 
> ...



I would recommend anything you can find written by Gordon Clark. A good online source of his works, is Trinity Foundation.

Review their archives . . .

Edited to add: A good read to start, is found here: http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=80


----------



## tommyb (Jan 19, 2010)

TeachingTulip said:


> I would recommend anything you can find written by Gordon Clark. A good online source of his works, is Trinity Foundation.
> 
> Review their archives . . .
> 
> Edited to add: A good read to start, is found here: Trinity Foundation: Explaining God, man, Bible, salvation, philosophy, theology.



Dittos, on Gordon Clark. Further, John Robbins is quite good and you can find a lot of his stuff on the trinity foundation site also. He is firmly in the Clark camp. His series of lectures on logic are very good.


----------



## MW (Jan 19, 2010)

Although it is not presuppositional, in terms of actually thinking through and finding helpful responses to unbelieving arguments, I highly recommend Gerstner's Reasons for Faith; Hodge's Way of Life is also very useful if you can bear the older style of writing.

I am not advocating evidentialism. It is just that many adopt the presuppositional approach who have not actually become acquainted with the ins and outs of evidential arguments. This really leaves them with a cup without water.


----------



## yeutter (Jan 19, 2010)

A member of my parish, Dr. Tim McGrew, has put together a nice selective bibliography of historical apologetics that can be found at Historical Apologetics: 1697-1893 | TheResurgence


----------



## MMasztal (Jan 19, 2010)

From the info you give us in the OP, your friend is clearly confused. 

A quick and easy way would be to use Greg Koukl's (Stand to Reason: Stand to Reason: Equipping Christian Ambassadors with Knowledge, Wisdom, and Character.) methods he uses in his book "Tactics". The quick version is to ask the other person 2 questions: 1) What do you mean by that? and 2) How did you come to that conclusion? Then let them talk and ask probing questions. 

I believe you will be able to show him that his mish-mash theology is an invention of his own mind. Then you can tell him what the Bible really teaches.

I use Koukl's "Tactics" in the Sr. High Apologetics class I teach. Just today one of my star pupils recalled and conversation she had with a Calvary Chapel elder over the weekend. This elder was giving her the Calvary Dispensational spiel which she doesn't subscribe to (she's kinda stuck going to Calvary since her mom goes there), so she asked him, "What do you mean by that?". Well the elder was quite befuddled with her question and was unable to answer her, so he gave her a Dispensational end-times DVD to watch which did not impress her. I said to her, "You used what you learned from the Tactics book!". She realized that she had and gave me a big smile!


----------



## Don Kistler (Jan 19, 2010)

I'd recommend "Reasons for Faith" by the late John H. Gerstner, as well as his book "Theology in Dialogue." Both are excellent resources for the very situation you described.


----------



## au5t1n (Jan 19, 2010)

Before my dad was a believer, he was big into philosophy, and he believed in the existence of a God, but did not buy Christianity. The Christians he had met could not hold their own against him philosophically. He ended up meeting a knowledgeable Catholic at work who put him on his heels with philosophy. Later, he was converted (in his car), and he started studying Christianity, ultimately settling on Protestant over Catholic beliefs.

The point being, you may just be this guy's "Catholic"  May God grant you the knowledge and wisdom to help this person.


----------



## Ne Oublie (Jan 20, 2010)

Thank you all greatly for your encouragement and recommendations. 
I will go forth as a Nehemiah of sorts. I ask for your prayers.
I pray that I am an ambassador depending on the grace and peace of the Holy Spirit to guide and navigate. 
And that may I first show the amazing love and mercy that is in all of God's law.
That I am fully dependent, not on man and his mighty chariot, but on our Savior the King of Kings!

Thank you all again! 

*In God we boast all the day long, and praise thy name for ever. Psalm 44:8 *


----------

