A Short Response to the Accusation of Circular Reasoning (according to John Frame)

“Apologetes arguing in this presuppositional way will need to be prepared to respond to charges of circularity. To respond to this charge, the apologete should recognize that all arguments are circular.* However, broadly circular arguments are better than narrowly circular ones. Appeals to authority in this way, done broadly circularly, are not problematic--when the authority is the Bible. God created us to reason, and to reason Christianly in a circular way. The unbeliever reasons in a narrowly circular way, defending his autonomous reason on the basis of his autonomous reason. The Christian, on the other hand, presupposes God’s revelation as the highest law of thought. Ever the Van Tillian, Frame says, “For a Christian, the content of Scripture must serve as his ultimate presupposition.” 

So the Christian reasons in a broad circle, from God’s word out into the world of facts and human existence and back to God’s word. Only grace can bring us from one circle to another.

—The Doctrine Shapes the Defense (Joel’s book on the role of the Trinity in John Frame’s apologetic)

*This must be the case, because when reasoning about one’s ultimate authority, there can be no other, greater authority to appeal to concerning it.