Discovering One's Presuppositions

[sevenzedek]

I have recently had some major theological discoveries lately and it has raised important questions for me. In the process of change, I have discovered the power that presuppositions can have in a person's life. They can lurk just beneath the surface and inform every decision and belief someone has. This has caused me to see the importance of discovering these presuppositions as a means of sanctification. I am relatively confident that someone on the board has dealt with this issue before. If you are one of them, do you know of any resources that would help me to discover my own presuppositions more effectively? Any books or articles that help to get at the root of the beliefs we hold?

Thanks.

 

[sevenzedek]

Anyone? (bump)

 

[crimsonleaf]

I guess no one can think of any publications to help. I sympathise, because as an atheist I did a 180 degree about-turn so had many presuppositions to not only address, but reverse. My own motto has always been "question everything; believe nothing" which sounds very nihilistic, but actually leads to the adoption of a balanced view over time. But it also helped me to learn how to break my own rules. I questioned (and still question) elements of my own theology until the evidence for one opinion or another becomes overwhelming and I believe. My first presupposition was that the idea of God was just plain silly. Only after examining in detail every other possibility did I start to accept, then finally to believe. Just keep questioning, keep examining, and don't be afraid to commit to a view.

 

[sevenzedek]

I guess no one can think of any publications to help. I sympathise, because as an atheist I did a 180 degree about-turn so had many presuppositions to not only address, but reverse. My own motto has always been "question everything; believe nothing" which sounds very nihilistic, but actually leads to the adoption of a balanced view over time. But it also helped me to learn how to break my own rules. I questioned (and still question) elements of my own theology until the evidence for one opinion or another becomes overwhelming and I believe. My first presupposition was that the idea of God was just plain silly. Only after examining in detail every other possibility did I start to accept, then finally to believe. Just keep questioning, keep examining, and don't be afraid to commit to a view.

Thanks for responding.

It seems like the only method for getting at one's own presuppositions is to keep questioning and examining. That may be all I end up finding through this discussion. If so, I will have to make do. The idea of doing this kind of search is very new to me and I was hoping to be exposed to an article or discussion on the topic that would help me begin to think about it in helpful ways. However, I don't feel that I am at a loss.

It seems inconceivable that this issue would not be heavily addressed in philosophy. Perhaps our philosophically minded brethren could lend a hand in our endeavor.

 

[HaMetumtam]

I agree with you, i think knowing your presuppositions can help in arguments, i have come to believe those who dont think they have any presuppositions are closed off from considering any other opinion and are therefore have limited themselves. There are are few things I am closed off on, the Gospel and salvation by faith alone in Christ alone being the main one.

The main one i used to encounter was people who stated they dont follow teachings of men but stick solely to the bible. So there presupposition that any teaching coming from a man is wrong has cut them off from learning from great theologians...however these people seemed to me to be the very ones who wanted to teach everyone else their opinions ? the irony would be funny if it wasnt so sad. They probably don't recognize their underlying presupposition that is limiting them and the irony and logical inconsistencies that follow from them.

Maybe you could list the things you hold to be true self evidently (axioms) that should give you a big chunk of your theological presuppositions;

1. God exists
2. God is Father, Son, Holy Spirit
3. All things were created by Him

ect.ect

Perhaps you could write the book as you go and come up with a reformed view of presupposition.... by suggesting this i lay claim to 10% of future profits.

Scratch that just read the WCF for study classes by GI Williamson...

 

[sevenzedek]

This work of discovering one's own presuppositions and modifying them is inevitable for the Christian–it MUST happen. The reason I say this is because of the transforming work the word of God has on our thinking in the process of sanctification.

I am afraid, however, that many Christians I know (including myself) are inhibited in their ability to change and grow because of an inability to turn their eyes to themselves. Some are inhibited by an unwillingness as well. Their battle cry (so to speak) is, "This is just how I believe." I think this is a terrible way for a Christian to think. It is this kind of thinking that keeps the medicine of God's words from reaching areas that need healing.

Perhaps one of the most damaging presuppositions is to suppose that a person can become a believer and interpret the bible and the Christian life with the same old thinking they always had as an unbeliever. When a person is converted, I think a BIG question mark should loom over everything they have ever thought to be true in order to make them open to transformation. Instead, it seems that some (perhaps MANY–most?) come to their new life with their old mental baggage. Who is there to tell them that all of their old ways of thinking will need to change (MUST change)?

 

[crimsonleaf]

Ah, but you don't think, "This is just how I believe", so you'll be fine!

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Quick, answer the following questions..

1. Ultimate Reality: What kind of God, if any, actually exists?
2. External Reality: Is there anything beyond the cosmos?
3. Knowledge: What can be known and how can anyone know it?
4. Origin: Where did I come from?
5. Identity: Who am I?
6. Location: Where am I?
7. Morals: How should I live?
8. Values: What should I consider of great worth?
9. Predicament: What is humanity's fundamental problem?
10. Resolution: How can humanity's problem be solved?
11. Past/Present: What is the meaning and direction of history?
12. Destiny: Will I survive the death of my body and, if so, in what state?

(Src: Kenneth Richard Samples. World of Difference, A: Putting Christian Truth-Claims to the Worldview Test)

Now you are on your way to discovering your presuppositions.

 

[Hilasmos]

Quick, answer the following questions..
1. Ultimate Reality: What kind of God, if any, actually exists?
2. External Reality: Is there anything beyond the cosmos?
3. Knowledge: What can be known and how can anyone know it?
4. Origin: Where did I come from?
5. Identity: Who am I?
6. Location: Where am I?
7. Morals: How should I live?
8. Values: What should I consider of great worth?
9. Predicament: What is humanity's fundamental problem?
10. Resolution: How can humanity's problem be solved?
11. Past/Present: What is the meaning and direction of history?
12. Destiny: Will I survive the death of my body and, if so, in what state?
(Src: Kenneth Richard Samples. World of Difference, A: Putting Christian Truth-Claims to the Worldview Test)
Now you are on your way to discovering your presuppositions.

Then take your answers and compare it to how you live; now you are on your way to seeing how many presuppositions you have that you don't actually believe.

 

[sevenzedek]

Ah, but you don't think, "This is just how I believe", so you'll be fine!

I presuppose that I do. That follows from the original post.

 

[sevenzedek]

Quick, answer the following questions..
1. Ultimate Reality: What kind of God, if any, actually exists?
2. External Reality: Is there anything beyond the cosmos?
3. Knowledge: What can be known and how can anyone know it?
4. Origin: Where did I come from?
5. Identity: Who am I?
6. Location: Where am I?
7. Morals: How should I live?
8. Values: What should I consider of great worth?
9. Predicament: What is humanity's fundamental problem?
10. Resolution: How can humanity's problem be solved?
11. Past/Present: What is the meaning and direction of history?
12. Destiny: Will I survive the death of my body and, if so, in what state?
(Src: Kenneth Richard Samples. World of Difference, A: Putting Christian Truth-Claims to the Worldview Test)
Now you are on your way to discovering your presuppositions.

Then take your answers and compare it to how you live; now you are on your way to seeing how many presuppositions you have that you don't actually believe.

I am able to make a difference between presuppositions I really have and the ones I think I have but don't really have. Is this what you are aiming toward?

Setting out on this endeavor seems a bit like peeling away layers of an onion. It doesn't seem like it could ever be finished.

 

[sevenzedek]

12. Destiny: Will I survive the death of my body and, if so, in what state?

Presupposition: I am a guilty sinner unworthy of the grace of God; barely able to lift my head up to God at times. He hardens whom he wills. Will he harden me?

New Presupposition: Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Destiny: I will enjoy God forever.

Process: Sanctification.

I am sure there are layers beneath this internal dialogue. Pride? Probably. I am often not helped by the apparent need to be worthy to call on the name of the Lord.

 

[HaMetumtam]

Presupposition: I am a guilty sinner unworthy of the grace of God; barely able to lift my head up to God at times. He hardens whom he wills. Will he harden me?

I would not describe this as a presupposition, this is an objective truth, you were always a guilty sinner unworthy of grace weather you presupposed it or not. Same for me.

New Presupposition: Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

This is an objective truth also. I dont think declarative statements found in the Bible should be assumed to be true or even presupposed to be true, they are true weather we accept/presuppose them or not. I think presupposition are found in areas where there is less logical certainty like eschatology where 'credible' interpretations can be offered based on Biblical data. Eschatology is choka blok with presuppositions, which is why it can be so confusing (for me anyway).

 

[sevenzedek]

Presupposition: I am a guilty sinner unworthy of the grace of God; barely able to lift my head up to God at times. He hardens whom he wills. Will he harden me?

I would not describe this as a presupposition, this is an objective truth, you were always a guilty sinner unworthy of grace weather you presupposed it or not.

New Presupposition: Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

This is an objective truth also. I dont think declarative statements found in the Bible should be assumed to be true or even presupposed to be true, they are true weather we accept/presuppose them or not. I think presupposition are found in areas where there is less logical certainty like eschatology where 'credible' interpretations can be offered based on Biblical data. Eschatology is choka blok with presuppositions, which is why it can be so confusing (for me anyway).

I think it would be useful to state a definition of presupposition. If it is a word that is used theologically, then I would prefer that definition.

(MAY THIS THREAD NOT BE HIJACKED!) Where this all stems from is the change from credo to covenantal baptism. There were several things that stood in my way to seeing the validity I the change. These hindrances I labeled "presuppositions." They were untested assumptions that governed my conclusions. I couldn't address them until I knew they were there.

For instance, these were what I consider to be incorrect presuppositions:

1. To be a member of the New Covenant means to be an elect person. I did not see the legal and communal aspects of the covenant.

2. That baptism was given by God to validate a person's faith rather than the faithfulness of God's promise.

3. The New Covenant is a completely new covenant rather than an old one renewed.

4. I could go on.

The point is that these underlying beliefs (what I call presuppositions) prevented me from seeing what I believe to be the truth. If these should not be called presuppositions, then what should they be called?

Unless there is a definite theological sense in which the word "presupposition" is used, then calling a biblical truth a presupposition is not an incorrect way to use the word. A presupposition IS an idea that is assumed before the beginning of a line of argument. Truths can fulfill the role of idea whether they are biblical, assumed, or incorrect. If there is another sense of the word, then help me see it.

 

[HaMetumtam]

You can call a biblical truth a presupposition if you like. I dont want to divert the thread.

 

[sevenzedek]

You can call a biblical truth a presupposition if you like. I dont want to divert the thread.

I was warning against diverting the thread to another paedo debate.

I don't want to call a biblical truth a presupposition "if I like" if the general consensus is that I am wrong in doing so.

 

[Hilasmos]

I am able to make a difference between presuppositions I really have and the ones I think I have but don't really have. Is this what you are aiming toward?

Yes. If we want to talk about real presuppositions, that which your heart is really commited to. As was mentioned above, declaring things that are true in principle doesn't mean you hold to it consistently enough to call it a presupposition (beyond being theoretical).

For example, one may presuppose that prayer works before they pray, but then they don't pray very often. It seems like this is merely a principled presupposition. Their real heart commitment is that prayer doesn't work. For what the exampe is worth.

 

[HaMetumtam]

You can call a biblical truth a presupposition if you like. I dont want to divert the thread.

I was warning against diverting the thread to another paedo debate.

I don't want to call a biblical truth a presupposition "if I like" if the general consensus is that I am wrong in doing so.

Ok .... i thought i may be diverting the thread.

I only speak for myself but i would prefer to call a biblical truth an objective truth rather than presuppositions simply by the degree of certainty that the definitions carry. A presupposition is an assumption, where to me the level of truth is not clear and can be ambiguous, but an objective truth is true and always true.

So i dont see "Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved" as a Presupposition as per post #12 (athough it can be, so you can call it that if you like). I see it as an objective truth, which is true today was true yesterday and will be true tomorrow.

Thats all i was saying, but my being pedantic has probably just muddied the waters. sorry

 

[Peairtach]

Jon

Setting out on this endeavor seems a bit like peeling away layers of an onion. It doesn't seem like it could ever be finished.

Counsel in the heart of man is like deep water; but a man of understanding will draw it out. (Prov 20:5)

 

[sevenzedek]

I am able to make a difference between presuppositions I really have and the ones I think I have but don't really have. Is this what you are aiming toward?

Yes. If we want to talk about real presuppositions, that which your heart is really commited to. As was mentioned above, declaring things that are true in principle doesn't mean you hold to it consistently enough to call it a presupposition (beyond being theoretical).

For example, one may presuppose that prayer works before they pray, but then they don't pray very often. It seems like this is merely a principled presupposition. Their real heart commitment is that prayer doesn't work. For what the exampe is worth.

Again, we see how useful a presuppositional inquiry is in our sanctification.

 

[chuckd]

I would think that your own mind would be the sole resource for discovering your own presuppositions. Just become a skeptic for yourself and you'll discover a whole lot of presuppositions. What is life? Can God lie? Do you exist? Do I exist? Is blue, blue?

 

[ZackF]

Mercifully this is an exercise that God helps us with over a lifetime.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Obviously, not everyone comes to faith, nor grows in faith in exactly the same way. For some people, they will have an "epiphany" when they realize (or come to believe) that something they thought they knew was in error. This can be good or bad.

Changes of mind happen in ways we would identify as contrary-to-truth as well. It is simply a matter of rationalization. Think of some people who have begun in, or seemed to only "pass through," Reformed theology. Some people "get consistent" with their deepest convictions by jettisoning truths we think of as life-or-death mainstays of our faith.

Like some late transfers to Rome: what they discover is that the deepest commitment in their heart (a religious presupposition) is to the idea that there must be an earthly authority in this world which has the absolute certainty ordinary humans miss having (as they sense their own limitations). It is a "relief" to make this acceptation, because it involves a corresponding transfer of responsibility. That sense of well-being they now possess (however temporary and illusory) is more "true" to them than biblical propositions, formed into a creed.

In a sense, this "commitment to a feeling" one man obtains is indistinguishable from a similar feeling of relief that the same person may have felt when he was formerly "evangelically converted." He might have been encouraged to rest a considerable amount of his confidence/assurance in the power of that feeling. So what happens when such feeling wanes? If the presupposition is: my actually being right with God is somehow connected to or dependent on my feeling right with God, or in my comfort in an intellectual assent to propositions, then he will almost inevitably face the inadequacy of his presumed evangelical (Jesus-in-my-heart) certainty or mere doctrinal certainty.

So, I'm asking that we all recognize that for some people, a "thorough inventory" of one's theology may be due, at some time or other. But simply questioning things, even all the way down (as someone suggested above) is not of necessity a sure way to gain a better understanding of one's faith. It may well be; but it might also lead someone else into apostasy, where a simple, childlike faith would have sustained him all the way to glory. (I make that observation without special reference to the doctrine of election.)

 

[sevenzedek]

... But simply questioning things, even all the way down (as someone suggested above) is not of necessity a sure way to gain a better understanding of one's faith...

Bruce,

I often look forward to your reading your responses.

I agree with what you are saying. It was not too long ago that I looked into the debate over bible versions; even manuscript versions. Admittedly, it stretched my faith. For others, this would've been a very hard thing to do. For these, they may have had a difficult time maintaining a Christian confession while looking into the mess I found. This very issue (translations & manuscripts) has been the very means of many people's hardening. Therefore, I agree with you.

It is good that some people are "simple." However, I confess that I am not "simple." I have too many questions to be simple. It is wonderful that God uses both our strengths and weaknesses; even our sin, to promote our sanctification.

Your admonition serves to balance a prior post. It is good that you have spoken. It was fitting for you to balance the advice already given. I would not recommend everyone to question EVERYTHING either.

For my part, I must have the feeling of solid ground under my feet where God has enlarged my steps. But sanctification is one of those strange bible tensions. Even though we grasp certain truths, we hold these truths imperfectly. Yet we are all called to rest in what we know, even though there is a heretic in every one of us.