Presuppositional Apologetics: Counter-Script with Responses

Update 2/27/2014:  For a further refinement of this table please visit my next post.

The following table is a condensed version of the video by TheGlobalAtheism on presuppositional apologetics.  I've also added some other questions/declarations typically in the pre-sup's script, along with the responses.  TheGlobalAtheism's points are numbered (in the order he presented them).

The "Actual Answer" (Column 4) is the one provided by TheGlobalAtheism, the "honest" or technically correct answer.   It can get pretty complicated since the pre-sup will argue those responses, so in Column 5, I've provided the "Quick & Dirty" response--the response with the purpose of turning them back to their faulty, unproven premise and bring the discourse to a quick close.  In asking where the apologist gets their standard, foundation, absolutes or authority in terms of their question or statement, you are getting them back to their pre-suppositional starting point:  that, as Sye Ten Bruggencate's website asserts:  "We can know that the Bible is true because it claims to be true and proves it by the impossibility of the contrary!" 

 

So once you get the "God/Jesus" or "Word/Bible" response, you simply go back to Point 1, advise the apologist the premise of their god's existence is unproven, and shut off the conversation with the same "courteous close" that Sye Ten uses:  "Thank you for your time."  And then refuse to answer any more questions, since you've just advised (honestly) you're not going to respond to meaningless propositions based on a faulty premise.  You may need to be tenacious in repeating the question until they give you "it's from God (or in the Bible)" response.

 

A few of these questions/statements (Points 3, 9,11, 13 and 14), however, have a Quick & Dirty Answer that does not require you go to Point 1, although it can be used.  The answers are also designed to end the discourse.  The one question that so often starts the pre-sup interrogation has an even better answer as discovered by Alex Botten, which is to name one thing for which you are absolutely or 100% certain (usually a continuation of "Could you be wrong about everything you claim to know?").  Alex calls it the "lulz" response:  "I am 100% certain that I am not the god you worship."  You can immediately see where this leads.

 

Since I consider pre-suppositional apologetics a "con", the third column is called "Mark" Response because that is the response the pre-sup is looking for from an unknowing non-believer, the "mark" of his con word game.

 

If you have any other questions/responses you'd like to see added to this table, please advise me either at YouTube in a PM or in the comments.

THE PRESUPPOSITIONALIST SCRIPT WITH APPROPRIATE RESPONSES 

No.	Question or Statement	"Mark"' Response	Actual Answer	QUICK & DIRTY ANSWER
A	Almost all questions below (except a few have even better responses, as emphasized)	See last column	This question is based upon the starting point of your apologetic methodology.  Until you demonstrate the core presupposition of that starting point, that your god exists, the dependent propositions which follow have no merit and are irrelevant.	Until you demonstrate your premise (that your god exists), all propositions hinging on that premise are not relevant. Thank you for your time.
B	How to you justify (account) for your morals?  Where do you get your moral foundation?	Myself	Since this foundation or justification is based upon the existence of a god which you have not proven in your core presupposition, it follows you have not proven any moral foundation or standard.	Where do YOU get your moral foundation?  If "from god", go to A.
1	Is it impossible for the god of the Bible to exist?	No	It depends on how you define God. Yes if omniscient/ omnipotent, because these are mutually contradictory.	Yes, explain why is it possible?  If "god" then go to A.
2	Is it impossible for the Bible to be what it claims to be?	No	If the god of the bible does not exist, then it logically follows that the bible is not the word of god.	Yes, explain why is it possible?  If "god" then go to A.
3	Could you be wrong about everything you claim to know?	Yes	Philosophically, yes, I'm not omniscient.  Scientifically, there's 3 bits of knowledge we can be certain of, 2 of which we can't be wrong: 1.  Laws/observations (can't be) 2.  Facts  (can't be) 3.  Theories	I am 100% certain that I am not the god you worship. Thank you for your time.
4	Could you be wrong about that?  (Is it possible a fact or law could be proven wrong?) (This is the same question if you answer No.)	Yes.	No, by definition, above.  If it was wrong to begin with, then it would not be a fact.	(Here the pre-sup is in the untenable position of trying to convince you that you are their god or are omniscient)
5	Does absolute truth exist?  Yes or No.  (Do you believe in absolutes?)	Well....	Yes, forms of absolute truth do exist, but it's more complicated than that.	How do you define absolutes?  If "of god" then go to A.
6	Does knowledge have to be true?	Well....	Not necessarily; depends on your definition.	How do YOU define true or truth?  If "of god" then go to A.. Or ask if they mean "absolutely true" and then ask how they define absolutes.  If "of god" go to A.
7	Out of all the knowledge in the universe, how much do you have?	Well.....no Maybe 1%	Yes:  since knowledge is a human construct, humans possess 100% of all knowledge (potential knowledge will be acquired)	Who has all the knowledge in the universe?  If "God" then go to A.
8	Is there something in the 99% that could contradict the 1%?	Well.... maybe	No, not the first 2 because new knowledge does not contradict base laws of logic	(This is an extension of Point 9, which will send you to A)
9	God has revealed things to me in a way that I can be certain. (scripturally)	Well....	No, it is not possible. (1) He does not exist (2) If he did, you might not be able to cognitively understand his answer to certain questions.	Do YOU have any way to check or verify that it was your god?  How can you be certain you're not being deceived?
	God does not lie!	Uh....	(inserted)   A god who does not have the capability of lying is not omnipotent.	How do you know that? If "Bible" go to A.
	God has made everyone certain through his word!	Huh?	(inserted) Isn't making you think you're certain exactly the kind of thing a deceiving god would do? And then ask "would a deceiver try to deceive you?" & follow up with "how can you be certain of that?"	Why should I think the Bible is authoritative to begin with?  If "god" then go to A.
10	What is your (ultimate) authority?	Myself.	Myself.  We all have a tool: logic.	Who do YOU deem as your ultimate authority?  If "god" then go to A.
11	How do you know that your reasoning  is valid?	Well.....	Reasoning is a process model we use based on all our senses which is falsifiable (we can test it).	Are YOU telling me I can't trust my reasoning (senses)?  If I can't, then I can't trust you.  Thank you for your time.
12	Are there people whose reasoning isn't valid?  How do you know that you're not one of those people?	Yes... (next Question)	Because I can successfully navigate through life.	How would YOU know I wasn't? What standard do you use?  If "god" then go to   A.
	(Then your reasoning is viciously circular!)		(inserted) We do reason with our reason, but it is not viciously circular.  It is developed through experience.	What is defined as visciously circular as compared to not?  On answer of "God-Bible  (being virtuously circular)", go to A.
13	What are you using to justify senses and reasoning?	My senses?	Reasoning  is a model with predictive capability using our sensory input which independently converge to form a picture of reality.	Are you telling me I can't trust my reasoning (senses)?  If I can't, then I can't trust you. Thank you for your time.
14	Name one thing you can be absolutely certain about.	I'm not sure.... Nothing?	Philosophically, yes, I'm not omniscient.  Scientifically, there's 3 bits of knowledge we can be certain of, 2 of which we can't be wrong: 1.  Laws/observations (can't be) 2.  Facts  (can't be) 3.  Theories	I'm 100% certain I'm NOT the god you worship.  (or that I'm not omniscient). Thank you for your time.
15	Is your worldview based on faith?	No.	By strictest definition, my worldview is not based on faith.	What do YOU base your worldview on?  If "god" then go to A.
	The Christian worldview is the only consistent/ plausible one because of the impossibility of the contrary!	Huh?	(inserted) If they say other worldviews are not consistent, re-direct question:  you're not asking about other worldviews, you're asking why or how the Christian one is only plausible one.	How (or why) is it impossible?  If "Bible" or "god" go to A. (Ask why all other world views aren't plausible until they get to "god.") OR "I reject that assertion" then go to A.
16	The laws of logic, science, morality which we use everyday are universal, immaterial & unchanging. How does a strictly natural world account for such unchanging laws? ("...then you believe in logical absolutes?")	I don't know...	These laws are descriptive, not prescriptive.  There's no reason to think they're prescriptive. (Prescriptive = sanctioned or authorized, not a way to describe something)	How do YOU account for (laws of logic, reason, logical absolutes)? What are your standards for these laws?  If "god" or "Bible" then go to  A.
17	The only thing that can make sense of the immaterial, unchanging, universal laws of logic, science and morality is an immaterial, unchanging, universal god--the god of the bible and of scripture.	I don't know	As we discover new information, we may necessarily have to change these laws.  We have done so for centuries (Newton's Principia on gravity and motion or Huygens' theories on celestial orbits)	Even if I accepted that there was an immaterial, unchanging and universal being , there's no logical step between that and "therefore Jesus."  Thank you for your time. OR   "I reject that assertion" and then go to A.
18	We could not know anything without the god of the Bible.  We'd be forced to say we could be wrong about things, because without certainty you can't know anything, which is intellectually a foolish position and why the bible says "The fool has said in his heart there is no god."	Huh?	Even if you accepted everything in their script (except the base premise, of course), it does not set you on the doorstep of Christianity.	Are you saying that I cannot be certain about anything?  Anything?  I know one thing I'm certain of....I'm not the god that you worship. OR "I reject that assertion" and then go to A.
	(The proof of god is that without him you can't prove anything.)		(inserted) (1) Which god and (2) How do you go about proving that?	"I reject that assertion" and then go to A.