What Is the Argument from Reason, and How Does It Destroy Atheism?

If your brain is just a swirl of atoms bumping into each other, why trust anything it tells you? That’s not a rhetorical question—it’s the fatal flaw at the heart of naturalism. In this article, I unpack the Argument from Reason, a devastating challenge to atheistic materialism famously advanced by C. S. Lewis. Drawing from Lewis, Paul Gould, and presuppositional heavyweights like Van Til and Bahnsen, I make the case that reason itself—your ability to think, reflect, and infer—only makes sense in a world created and governed by the God of Scripture. If you’ve ever wondered whether atheists can account for logic, or how to expose the internal contradiction of naturalism, this is where you begin.

The Pot, the Preconditions, and the Problem with Atheism

Atheism borrows tools it can’t explain. In this debate, I challenged an agnostic atheist to account for logic, science, and morality without God—and when pressed, he had to invent universe-making aliens. This article unpacks why only the Christian worldview supplies the necessary preconditions of intelligibility—and why denying that ends in absurdity.

Apologetics, ArticlesJoel SettecaseMay 22, 2025presuppositional apologetics, Christian worldview, atheism vs Christianity, laws of logic, morality without God, uniformity of nature, transcendental argument, impossibility of the contrary, agnostic atheist debate, grounding for logic, biblical epistemology, Van Til apologetics, Joel Settecase debate, Christian apologetics blog, defending the faith, intelligibility and God, presuppositionalism explained, debate with atheist, Christian logic and reason, truth and the Bible, Presuppositional Apologetics books, Presuppositional apologetics vs classical apologetics, Presuppositional apologetics definition, Presuppositional apologetics PDF, Presuppositional apologetics reddit, Presuppositional definition, Presuppositional apologetics criticism, Presuppositional apologetics examplesComment

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

The Best Argument for Christianity Is Also the Simplest