RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
In defending the faith presuppositonalists point out that there are no brute facts!. To be meaningful a fact must be interpreted within the context of a worldview. Brute facts are mute facts.
Similarly, in destroying a non-Christian worldview the apologete will have more effeciency in attacking the heart of the heathen's worldview. Sure, one can show him that this or that fact about evolution or gay-marriage is inaccurate, but if the unbeliever is consistent he will have a ready explanation for each of the attacks (so much for reason being neutral).
Therefore, to be successful, the apologete must destroy the heart and soul of the unbeliever's worldview. In taking down a spiderweb you do not merely snip a few strands on the outside; rather, one must shatter the very heart of the web, thus making all the facts (if I may wax innovative for the moment) destroy each other (think of an imploding building).
Here is an example of this in the movie Shrek 2:
Fiona:"Shouldn't you be getting home to dragon?"
Donkey:"Oh... yeah that. I don't know... she's been all moody and stuff lately... so I thought I'd move back in with you guys!"
Fiona:"Well you know we're always happy to see you Donkey."
Shrek:"But Fiona and I are married now. We need a little time... you know... to be together.... just with each other.... alone."
Donkey:"Say no more! Say no more! You don't have to worry about a thing! I will always be here to make sure nobody bothers you!"
Shrek:"Donkey!"
Donkey:"Yes roommie?"
Shrek:"Your bothering me!"
Doneky: "Oh, I see. Well, me and Pinnochio was going to catch a tournament later on."
exit stage
At first Shrek did not attack the very heart of Donkey's presuppostions, thus rendering most of his attack fruitless.
PS: This is not to suggest that Donkey was a vicious secularist or that Shrek was a Reformed Apologist!
Similarly, in destroying a non-Christian worldview the apologete will have more effeciency in attacking the heart of the heathen's worldview. Sure, one can show him that this or that fact about evolution or gay-marriage is inaccurate, but if the unbeliever is consistent he will have a ready explanation for each of the attacks (so much for reason being neutral).
Therefore, to be successful, the apologete must destroy the heart and soul of the unbeliever's worldview. In taking down a spiderweb you do not merely snip a few strands on the outside; rather, one must shatter the very heart of the web, thus making all the facts (if I may wax innovative for the moment) destroy each other (think of an imploding building).
Here is an example of this in the movie Shrek 2:
Fiona:"Shouldn't you be getting home to dragon?"
Donkey:"Oh... yeah that. I don't know... she's been all moody and stuff lately... so I thought I'd move back in with you guys!"
Fiona:"Well you know we're always happy to see you Donkey."
Shrek:"But Fiona and I are married now. We need a little time... you know... to be together.... just with each other.... alone."
Donkey:"Say no more! Say no more! You don't have to worry about a thing! I will always be here to make sure nobody bothers you!"
Shrek:"Donkey!"
Donkey:"Yes roommie?"
Shrek:"Your bothering me!"
Doneky: "Oh, I see. Well, me and Pinnochio was going to catch a tournament later on."
exit stage
At first Shrek did not attack the very heart of Donkey's presuppostions, thus rendering most of his attack fruitless.
PS: This is not to suggest that Donkey was a vicious secularist or that Shrek was a Reformed Apologist!
