The Laws of Logic Require God: A Response to Stranglewood

Can atheism account for the laws of logic? In this powerful breakdown of his debate with an atheist named Stranglewood, Joel Settecase demonstrates why logic itself demands the triune God of Scripture. Drawing from a presuppositional, Reformed framework, Joel exposes the fatal weaknesses in secular reasoning and lays out the clear, biblical foundation for truth, knowledge, and rational thought. This article isn’t a recap—it’s a rallying cry for Christians to stand firm in their worldview and challenge unbelief at its root.

Why Do You Believe In God, When We Have the Principle of Sufficient Reason?

When an agnostic tried to ground logic and knowledge in the Principle of Sufficient Reason instead of the triune God, I showed why that foundation crumbles under its own weight. Only the God of the Bible provides the necessary preconditions for intelligibility—and without Him, you’re left with floating concepts and borrowed capital. Here’s how the debate unfolded—and why presuppositional apologetics still stands undefeated.

Apologetics, DebateJoel SettecaseApril 22, 2025presuppositional apologetics, principle of sufficient reason, Christian worldview, impossibility of the contrary, transcendental argument, Van Til apologetics, logic and Christianity, defending the faith, Reformed apologetics, triune God, PSR vs God, torsion argument, internal critique, prime reality, apologetics for churchesComment