Eric Hernandez vs Sye Ten Bruggencate (Classical vs Presuppositional Apologetics)

In this debate/discussion Eric Hernandez and Sye Ten Bruggencate meet on the Sin Boldly radio show to talk about which apologetics method is best and biblical.

Comment below which method you think is the best approach that has a biblical support.

Many thanks to pastor Evan McClanahan, host of the Sin Boldly Radio Show for allowing us to use this content. To listen to more shows from the Sin Bodly Podcast, download in iTunes or click on the following link:


Eric Hernandez

#Bibleverses, #Bible prayers, #BibleInspiration, #BooksoftheBible, #PeopleoftheBible, #BibleProphecy


  1. Edwin van gent says:

    1:01 a good example when his argument falls apart, and changes the subject and cuts it of.. So all it is , it's a argument to defend your faith by by dismissing your whole existants ! Respect.

  2. Edwin van gent says:

    To DESTROY SEY.. You must start with'' I AM EXPERIENCE IN THIS MOMENT THE WORLD WITH ME MY CONSCIENCE'' So you can still lose the debate because of rhetorical skills, but sey's argument is in NOW WAY stronger to demonstrate that the christian god exists then to the argument That I am experience this moment… If you learn to debate and know the logical fallacies presuppers use to confuse the opponent and that is really important, and your goal is not to admit they are wrong, but just that they got stuck and can't argue any further, you won. If you look at Sey's debates when he sense he will be trapped, then he starts with all kinds of excuses and words like it's sad, and what a waste that you will go to hell, and above all he starts claiming victory and the debat is over… It looks strong but the thing is he must be in the narrative using that he will not put god or the bible to be judge etc etc. The only ''magic'' there is is Self Conscience'' and life is a stream of '' Non Sequitur's'' but sometimes life is logic. 🙂 ?-!

  3. Tony Byers says:

    I suspect the reason Sye states that he was an evidentialist previously and abandoned for the Pre Supp position that was that it's easier to assert a fact you have no evidence for than provide evidence for it. So he effectively admitted defeat and just asserted as fact that the Christian god exists.

  4. Mick Q says:

    What's the best way convince people unicorns are real …. Who cares as long as we can make a quick buck doing it !!!

  5. Mick Q says:

    It's like listening to 3 mental patients .

    " what's the best way to convince people an invisible being that can manifest in reality exists"

    1. Tell them they already know he exists , and then call them fools when they disagree.
    2. Offer to show them evidence , then offer no evidence , not even a reliable method to obtain evidence, just vague philosophical arguments.

    The reason there are so many denominations of Christians ?

    The bible is vague , God is a concept , people interpret it and believe whatever tickles their fancy.

  6. Jeff Porcaro Groove says:

    The presuppositional model is humble…the most biblical and we need to examine and continue to examine method…in the process of "apologetics" we can slip into imbalanced methods which is why we need feedback from another if available…hey bro, you got a little off when you spoke about… Humility receives correction with thankfulness because it is about getting it right, not being right. Ego always is the battle! most men are ego-driven…the lust to win and feel empowered. that means we sin to do God's work…ironic isn't it. Blessed are the poor in spirit!

  7. Santiago Martinez says:

    wow sye needs a new career

  8. MacXpert74 says:

    Although I as a atheist don't share the beliefs that Eric has about the existence of God, I do think his approach is a lot more intellectually honest than the warped presuppositional approach of Sye.

  9. MacXpert74 says:

    Sye's position all comes down to the fallacy of circular reasoning. He says he knows God exists because it was revealed thru scripture. But how do we know the scripture is true? Sye would argue "because it's the word of God".
    Everything he says about "logic coming from God" etc, can all be broken down if we ask him how he determined that. Because his argument would lead to something from the bible, he can't demonstrate to be the truth.

  10. MacXpert74 says:

    The type of arguments Sye uses can at the most be convincing to him and others that already believe the same thing. His arrogant position that everybody already knows God exists will never be accepted by a atheist, because it is a clear lie. So he might as well throw the towel in the ring, because he lost already before he said anything when this is the position he takes.

  11. Mrcookjr says:

    This is like listening to two children argue over Santa. Terrible.

  12. MsDjessa says:

    I usually watch debates with an atheist versus a theist. Been meaning to see a debate between two theists so this will be interesting. But no matter who he's debating I can't imagine Sye winning a debate. :'D
    I have no idea how Hernandez (now as it was pointed out I do remember him debating Dillahunty) would try to convince an atheist like me but I'm sure it can't possibly be as unimpressive as Sye's ramblings.

    Sye fails right in the beginning. He presented a false dichotomy. There are plenty of Christians who accept the age of the Earth. In fact that Dinosaur soft tissue thing he completely misrepresented (either deliberately or by accident) was discovered by a CHRISTIAN scientist called Mary Schweitzer. And she's not happy about how creationists try to take her work out of context. I recommend all Christians to find out what she herself says about it.

    Listening to Sye I wonder why he even bothers to debate. With Hernandez I could imagine an actual conversation.

  13. Jimmy David says:

    This is like 2 kids arguing over Santa. Should they use the presents under the tree as "proof" that Santa exists and was there last night, or not even bother and simply assert that Santa is real?!… The sad thing is that kids eventually stop believing in Santa Claus, sooner or later, but here we have 2 grown men talking and behaving like eternal children who never developed the rational part of their infantile brains.

  14. nancy espinosa says:

    Sye is a man of God..

  15. ZiplineShazam says:

    Sye's Cowardly escape hatch. . . "I won't do bible studies with atheists".

  16. ZiplineShazam says:

    "Who's god is the true god?" Is it the Classical Apologist's version or is it the Presuppositionalist's version ? Why won't the god of the bible make the revelation of "his word" absolutely 100% clear to ALL of his followers ?!? It's amazing how much time and effort it takes for Christians to prove that their version of "god" is the only version of "god".

  17. Franklin Allen says:

    Epistemic certainty = Objective absolute infallible certainty.

    Simplified term = God exists without man. He always was, is, and will be. -Amen

    Ontological certainty = philosophically certain

    Sye Ten B: is on point and quotes scripture accurately and provides verses for every belief system he has.
    Clear, concise and consistent. His position calls even self-proclaimed Christians into repentance when they deny God as the final authority. Unfortunately this can appear at times thick skinned, but is a needed truth for the wolves running around in sheeps clothing. When you step outside an epistemological stance that God is absolute and entertain that “if God doesn’t exist,” when conversing with self-proclaiming atheists you place God on trial. This is opposition to what God shows us through scripture that there is no such thing as an atheist.

    The host: ‘Where does Jesus fit in apologetics?’ Yeshua is God. Presuppositionalism is completely centered around God and points us to scripture, thus it points directly to the words of Yeshua who is God.

    Eric Hernandez: is loosely quoting scripture, and paraphrasing. His main argument is that we are not putting God on trial, but putting the atheist and his beliefs on trial. This is wonderful idea, but it’s simply not biblical. He is subtil in his approach when he opposes Romans 1:18, maybe so much that he doesn’t even realize he’s doing it. He also makes a very alarming statement that the Bible doesn’t have the answers and that man is left to use his own reason. This clearly opposes scripture when God says lean not to your own understanding, (Prov 3:5; Isaiah 28:10) and again all knowledge and wisdom are granted by God alone (1 Corinthians 12:8). His whole stance for Classical is that’s how Paul did it, but if you look closer Paul had a very aggressive presuppositional position (Acts 17:16-23).

    Closing: Eric makes a wonderful statement that apologetics isn’t the message of scripture, but rather a form of how we interpret scripture into an apologetic approach. Unfortunately he goes on to say that the Bible doesn’t have the answers for what method of apologetics should be used while insinuating that understanding is up to men. His view discredits God’s ability to grant us knowledge which again goes against what God’s word teaches. (Hosea 4:6)

    Sye’s view on presuppositional apologetics is Biblical. Plain and simple. It relies on God’s word. His methodology acknowledges God’s Sovereignty over knowledge wisdom and all things in existence. Sye doesn’t even accredit this method to himself, but gives God all the glory.
    Then follows with scriptural reasoning. (Luke 21:15)

    Pro 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
    Pro 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

    The two main scriptures demonstrated for each stance seem to both agree with presuppositional views.

    2Co 10:3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
    2Co 10:4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)
    2Co 10:5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;
    2Co 10:6 And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled.

    Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
    Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
    Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
    Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
    Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

    Personal thoughts:
    Yes there is a balance between presuppositional apologetics and instruction that only God can reveal. The presuppositional view is consistent with our God of the Bible, but there is a time to teach by the Spirit of God. Knowing that line can only be revealed by God. As Sye says: “One thing the Bible never says is that sheep become goats.”

    2Ti 2:22 Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.
    2Ti 2:23 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.
    2Ti 2:24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
    2Ti 2:25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
    2Ti 2:26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

  18. voodootree says:

    Presupposition is THE MOST offensive twatwaffling I am aware of. It not only fails to be a compelling argument for your nonsense, it IS a compelling reason to not bother talking with theists.

  19. MasterCedar says:

    Like two lunatics arguing over what type of cheese the moon is made of

  20. Brian Young says:

    I was raised Lutheran. Then I read the Book! Sorry Lutheran's but the Book trumps your catechism. lol. And don't get me started on the Catholics. I encourage you to Read the BOOK. That's all you need!!!!

  21. Ray Smith says:

    Paul was a fallible human. Paul could have been wrong when he wrote Romans 1. Sye is hanging his hat totally on the ASSUMPTION that Paul was right.

  22. Lord of Thunder says:

    2 CHARLATANS Masturbating Bullshit.

  23. Traditional500 says:

    ATHEISM IS MISERY since Atheists believe their existence will be deleted at death or with the onset of Alzheimers/Dementia; and they're PRETENDING TO BE quite "Happy" patiently awaiting Annihilation; AND ATHEISTS TRY TO SPREAD ATHEISM SINCE MISERY LIKES COMPANY!!!
    I really believe Atheists are actually Insane, displaying such demented delusional "Pretend Happiness" in the face of Impending Deletion of Every single Experience of their lives. Can you imagine a prisoner having his last Delicious meal before execution, and being Euphoric about it???
    This world is becoming One Big Mental Asylum and Materialists are leading the way to Western Society suiciding itself with Low birthrates and Ideologies of Despair.

    Atheism in a nutshell; "We come from an inconceivable nothingness. We stay a while in something which seems equally inconceivable, only to vanish again into the inconceivable nothingness." – Atheist Peter Wessel Zapffe, Philosopher.
    Search : "Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment", It will be PROVEN to you that a Supreme Consciousness watches over this Universe, and I put to you, that Supreme Consciousness is God.

  24. Robert Saget says:

    Sye will never understand the mistake he is making because instead of listening and trying to understand the criticism, he talks over, changes the discussion, or gets mad.

  25. Johnundefined Lovell says:

    These guys are licking Jesus pussy for everlasting life

  26. Doug says:

    i think both. You know God exists because He has revealed Himself to you through His Spirit, through all creation, through the life, death and resurrection of Christ, through His word, through His providence. All these are evidences that the atheist cannot, but does deny.

  27. alicantino11 says:

    As an atheist, this is just HILARIOUS to listen to…