I’ve struggled with how to communicate the inherent contradictions of worldviews that do not start with the unchanging, unbound, transcendent Creator revealed in creation, the Bible, and in Jesus.
This is not the perfect communication medium, but if a picture is worth 1000 words, it assists with pointing out the inconsistency when naturalists assume certain aspects of reality. Based on their assumptions, to give a proper satisfactory explanation (justification) for the following components of reality, they must borrow from the Christian Worldview.
- Truth – how it can be known for certain
- Absolute Laws – math, physics, chemistry, laws of logic, thermodynamics
- Inherent Human Value
- Consciousness
- Uniformity of Nature
- Morality (Justice, Right, Evil…)
Consistency matters! God is worthy of all praise!
ApoloJedi 
Pingback: Late January 2019 Van Tillian Apologetics’ Links | The Domain for Truth
Wow you have been on a roll recently!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks! I want to be a faithful witness
LikeLiked by 1 person
God bless you brother
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on Math Is Christian and commented:
This is really 6 flowcharts. He does well, considering that he is limiting himself to small nodes.
I’m glad that he included consciousness. Regarding consc, the unbeliever has an even worse time explaining why we have *qualia*, or why assuming naturalism anyone’s subjective experience is what it is just because he or she has a certain brain state, or that there is something it is like to be me.
The one-time math student David Chalmers has exposed naturalism’s shortcomings in this regard, though he has no answer.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Can Your Worldview Withstand Scrutiny? | ApoloJedi
Pingback: What is Presuppositional Apologetics? | ApoloJedi
Pingback: Calling the Bluff 1.0 | ApoloJedi