I love this brother🙏🏽

Any appeal to logic - cannot, by necessity, be applied in such a way as to refer to logic itself. (Logic’s Foundation is the content of the Presupp. Argument’s first premise). Anyone trying to argue for the existence of a god in such a circular way is exactly what Sye is notoriously known for saying: admitting foolery - as one’s argument is defeated before ever starting.

His method makes its proponents look foolish ie only useful if you want more atheists.

Another Sye's cowardly escape hatches: "I don't need to prove you God's existence because you can't be a judge, only God can judge."

Yet, he asserts everyone knows the christian god and judges this god to be good.

You wrote: "Sye's Cowardly Escape Hatch = "I don't do Bible Studies with Non-Believers"" What, according to you, is _cowardly_ about him not doing Bible studies with despisers of the Bible?

@@maksimbolonkin You wrote: "Another Sye's cowardly escape hatches: "I don't need to prove you God's existence because you can't be a judge, only God can judge."" Wait...so, according to you, he needs to force you, against your hardened, God-despising will, to believe what you are willing to not believe? He _needs_ to? Or else _what?_

@@djengo77 lol, because it shows he can't defend his own claims. It's a way to run away.

I think the issue is that evidentialists start by assuming a fake neutrality and that is what "puts God on trial" there is a place for evidences as you have shown in the above verses , and primarily To strengthen the faith of believers

I think one can present evidence in a biblical manner and I would think Sye knows this. He knows Romans 1 well and it says God is already evident to the unbeliever. So if you used in a way that was a reminder of what they know, or in a way that didn't suggest they were lacking the evidence it would probably be fine. His problem with evidentialism seems to be it commonly gives that certainty up to a believer who has knowledge. Evidence is just awesome in addition to the apologetic.

I believe Sye would acknowledge (and he somewhat did near the end) that evidence can be helpful when grounded on scripture. My issue is that presuppositionalists have historically been painted (inaccurately) as "against evidence", and Sye can sometimes come across in that way. Nevertheless, I think what he's doing is great!

@@onehatmedia Evidence can't be grounded in scripture unless you provide evidence why we even should trust scripture. All Sye's doing is trying to byte his own tail while saying he chased a gazelle. He knows God doesn't exist, just suppressess that knowledge.

@@maksimbolonkin You have to ground evidence in something. Most people ground it in their fallible senses and reasoning. But give me a reason to trust them as reliable-you'll always fall back on your own fallible senses and reasoning. It's viciously circular. In order to have certainty, humans must ground their evidence on something outside of themselves, something infallible; otherwise they have no reason to trust anything. Scripture, as infallible, is the perfect ground for evidence. It needs no evidence to support itself, except itself, as it is the only true ground for all evidence. This is virtuously circular. It's virtuous because it's based on something infallible, thus it makes sense to use it to support itself. If you reject the infallibility of scripture, then you also necessarily reject the certainty of anything in life, including your own statements, above. And if those statements aren't certain, then on what grounds should I listen to them?

Do you know it reduced his worldview to absurdity?

Even evidentialist’s like Greg Koukl, William Lane Craig &etc who disavow the the presupp apologetic can’t avoid it in their debates. Both camps know it’s what the disbeliever is doing. I reject the “all or nothing” attitude for a “both and”. We should always “be ready”. ?;0)

Agree with you both Sara & lamony

evidencial approach is music to the Christians ears since it rings true the evidence of what they already know. It is useless to the unbeliever.

@@dmustakasjr what evidence?

@@shawn4888 I think... this evidence. #ThankYou

Transendental thinking is always circular because we’re dealing with presupps. The unbelievers worldview is viciously circular while the Christian presupps encompass all things. The atheists presupps make him have to reduce his whole worldview to absurdity while the Christians worldview is consistent. People choose absurdity and the view of No God because they love their sin, as God even says

Hi Pat. in all respect, I think you missed Sye's point about how reason is impossible without God (i.e. it has nothing to do with the Bible). It goes like this: Do you agree that some people think they are rational, yet, in reality, they are not? The question is, how do you know that you are not one of those people? Is it not true that the only way you can test your own reason - is by using your own reason! It is an absurdity! Moreover, do possess all knowledge, all wisdom, and perfect moral character? If not, why do you base your worldview on less than all the facts, lacking in wisdom, and bereft of moral discernment? Yet, you can know Jesus Christ. Fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge and wisdom. Jesus Christ is the light of the world.

@@kenshiloh so basically you are saying "you can't be sure that you are not brain-damaged and can trust your reasoning, but I am sure I'm not brain-damaged because my God tells me so"

@@maksimbolonkin Yep. I think you got it. That is, if you trust your intellect, you know that you have been wrong more times than you can count! Hence, without God, you must place blind, unwarranted faith in your own reason. The absurdity is that you can only check your reason - with sound reason! Conversely, irrational people think they are rational; ever try to convince an irrational person otherwise? Moreover, that has been you in the past, hasn't it? You have been illogical and have not known it. Hence, you have blind and foolish faith in your own reasoning. However, for those who know Christ, the Holy Spirit leads and guides them into all truth. In about a month, my wife and I will celebrate our 28th anniversity. Yet, I would have divorced my wife years ago had it not been for the Word of God and the Holy Spirit's direction. By contrast, my father, an atheist, died alone, without ever finding a good companion, yet, through Christ, my marriage is better than ever. Instead of my family and I enjoying friendship every day, I would probably be living alone. That is just one example of how God has blessed my life. I can say that, through Christ, I also have absolute, perfect contentment and absolute freedom to do what I want, whenever I want! Freedom, contentment, eternal life - all because Jesus and I are great friends. Life is so, so good! I hope you will get to know Christ. All I did was to say, "Is there Jesus? I would like to meet Him!" All heaven filled my soul and it felt like my heart was made out of gold. Yet, trusting in your own intellect, certainly you must have doubts about the afterlife. Jesus said that all liars will find their place in the 'lake of fire.' Can you say, with certainty, that you are not heading there? However, since I know God, I can say that for decades now, I have not even had one second - not even a second - of doubt that I know God and am bound for heaven. I have absolute, total assurance of the afterlife. Yet, you can never get any light from your own fallible, biased, error-prone brain. I hope you will turn to Christ! Jesus Christ is the light of the world!

@@kenshiloh God I wish I was just as oblivious to sarcasm. Yes, I can say with certainty that I'm not reading to the lake of fire. I can't head to a place that doesn't exist. I'm heading to Valhalla instead.

@Shawn is that your judgment of Sye?

@@chadwilliams5756 Lol, nope it's just the facts. If you want a judgement I can offer that as well, but its not really relevent.

@@shawn4888 Wait what?!!?!?!?!? Can you show some evidence of this? Holy balls..

@Rusty Taco it was released in press release by his church and on his social media at the time, although he has since taken it down.

@shawn4888 The best part of the Christian worldview is you can't even take it down with events like this, as Christians don't claim to be perfect / sinless. In fact, the Bible specifically says the polar opposite... that not one of us is righteous / good. The entire point of Christianity is we recognize we are sinners in need of a savior. Unlike atheism, we don't put our egos above the truth & try to pretend we're perfect when we're clearly not. This is a major, major difference between the two worldviews.

It's simple. You don't understand the argument and it's rather easy to show that. ^ See? Baseless assertions are easy.

@@juilianbautista4067 Except sye is a fool and it's rather easy to show that., ie its not a baseless assertion.

@@juilianbautista4067 Why do presupps project so much?

@@shawn4888 You have claimed, but never shown that: _"sye [sic] is a fool and it's rather easy to show that."_ If it's rather easy to show it, then show it, Professor. :) You have baselessly asserted that _"its [sic] not a baseless assertion."_

@@juilianbautista4067 You wrote: "It's simple. You don't understand the argument and it's rather easy to show that. ^ See? Baseless assertions are easy." Your observation of the fact that Shawn does not understand the argument is not a baseless assertion. :) (But, I think I get where you're coming from. I've over and over discovered how easy it is to use God-despising fools' own language games against themselves.)

I wonder how many times Dillahunty needs to have his stupid skepticism murdered in front of his eyes to finally abandon it. I admire his misguided tenacity though. ^ See? I can make baseless assertions, too.

@@juilianbautista4067 the Op wasn't baseless, so why lie?

@@juilianbautista4067 I put these quick pithy responses to presupp videos in hopes that someone will engage in debate. I can defend my position, I wonder if you can defend yours.

@@juilianbautista4067 maybe you need some skepticism in your life.. especially if you think syes stupid I can’t be wrong because god said so is a good argument..

@@frostitutemcnuggets1947 "I can defend my position, I wonder if you can defend yours." That's a stupid thing to say. If you have a position, and he has a position, and each position is opposed to the other's, then one, and only one, of your respective positions is true, and the other, and only the other, is false. So, since you pretend that _your_ position is true, and that _his_ is false, it's only natural that you would say _"I can defend my position"._ But, _why_ would you say to him, _"I wonder if you can defend yours"?_ If his position is false, why would you wonder if he can defend it? Unlike you, rationally-thinking people do not think that what is _false_ can be defended. Here's the thing: You're an irrationally-thinking person, and your position is false, so I, being a rationally-thinking person, am not about to say to you, _"I wonder if you can defend your position."_ _Of course_ you cannot defend your position, because your position is false; I, being a rationally-thinking person, do not wonder about that one bit.