For instance, if a skeptic argues, "How can you trust the Bible when all we have are copies of copies of copies of copies?" the presuppositionalist can remain consistent and still respond to the specific claim. Instead, presuppositionalists may respond with, "How can you talk about trusting the Bible when you have no rational basis for trusting your rationality?" I do not think this is always necessary.It's important to use all the tools you have and sometimes an evidential approach is best. We must trust the leading of the Holy Spirit to know what approach to take.
THE APOLOGETIC FRONT: Another great presuppositional debate