In the continuing debate between self-declared "Christians" and "skeptics," of which The Skeptical Review is but a small (but relevant) part, accusations are regularly levied from both parties regarding the objective reason (or lack thereof) in the presentation of arguments. Is there a clear distinction between Christians and skeptics regarding the application of faith and reason in these debates? It is submitted herein that the underlying cognitive processes used by most Christians and skeptics are effectively identical. Ultimately, it is postulated that all parties involved are heavily influenced by inherent presuppositions (independent of whether or not the debater perceives that they exist).
Regarding the concept of inquiry, a self-declared "free-thinker" recognizes and accepts as a fundamental presupposition the free will of man to question everything, and ultimately to decide for himself what to (or not to) believe. A self-declared Christian also accepts the free will of man to question everything. Christians are clearly encouraged to "test everything" (1 Thess. 5:21), and are thus personally responsible for what they do (or do not) believe.
Regarding the concept of proselytizing, many "free-thinkers" believe that "it is wrong, always, everywhere, and for everyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence" (W. K. Clifford). As a consequence, "free-thinkers" regularly engage in discussions with individuals whose paradigm they would like to convert. Christians, likewise compelled to be involved in apologetics, must "sanctify the Lord God in (their) hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks (them) a reason for the hope that is in (them)"(1 Peter 3:15).
Regarding the concept of truth, a "free-thinker" typically accepts the scientific method and the corresponding results of empirical and theoretical science. This belief, however, requires the acceptance of two fundamental presuppositions. First, it must be accepted that truth is absolute. Second, it must be accepted that the human mind is capable of discerning between what is and what is not truth. Note that the scientific method is not purely objective. That is, deciding which question to ask, how to ask the question, and thereafter how to interpret the answer are all partly subjective processes. The scientist must ultimately accept on faith his ability to apply the scientific method toward discernment of truth. Without acceptance of the two aforementioned presuppositions, honest application of the scientific method is useless. In addition, without absolute immutable, truth, the scientific method will ultimately always fail. Clearly, it is the human understanding of truth, not truth itself, which is subject to revision and change. A Christian also adheres to the presuppositions of absolute truth and human capacity to discern truth. However, the Christian fundamentally accepts Jesus Christ as the Logos (John 1:1), i.e., as the ultimate embodiment of absolute truth (John 14:6). Therefore, both skeptics ("free-thinkers") and Christians share fundamental beliefs and presuppositions regarding the necessities of inquiry and proselytizing, as well as the existence and human ability to discern absolute truth.
(Michael Bradford, 9 Essex Street, Reading, MA 01867)
