Evidentialism comes with some difficulties, but intellectual integrity demands that we face those hurdles. Truth and goodness are worth the struggle.
Some difficulties come with the nature of the task. Errors and fallacies can undermine the veracity of evidentialism. Other difficulties are external. People may oppose your efforts to find and share what evidence indicates is true and good.
Complexity. The biggest challenge comes from complexity. Uncertainty abounds and often evidence doesn’t give us the confidence we desire. With so many possibilities, discerning what evidence indicates is most likely true often requires a lot of work. I believe it’s worth the effort. In fact, as a Christian, the effort is mandated. Scripture instructs us to seek earnestly and repeatedly holds up truth as a standard to strive for.
Questioning Presuppositionalism Can Be Costly. I put great effort into presenting my evidential ideas with grace, but presuppositionalists still take offense and sometimes condemn. I can use the most gentle, respectful approach possible, but simply disagreeing with a presuppositional doctrine sometimes raises ire regardless. Even Jesus faced this difficulty.
The religious leaders who opposed Jesus were presuppositionalists. They believed (without evidence beyond their rationalized understanding of scripture) that God would not appear in human flesh. Jesus made divinity claims (some vague, but some quite clear) and backed up those claims with evidence of miraculous signs. The religious leaders ignored the evidence. Trusting their presuppositions instead, they crucified Jesus.
I’ve often wondered if I would have believed Jesus. As an evidentialist I would have been impressed with his miracles, but I’m not sure that would have convinced me that his claims were true. I would have been extremely skeptical of a rabbi claiming to be the Messiah, even more skeptical of divinity claims. After the crucifixion I probably would have grown more skeptical because it seems unlikely that the Messiah or God in human flesh would allow the religious leaders to arrest and abuse him, let alone the Romans to execute him.
The resurrection would have convinced me though. By raising Jesus Christ from the dead, God gave us extremely powerful evidence if his divine nature.
Jesus Christ was an evidentialist. Science as we know it didn’t exist back then. Nor did modern statistics or standards of legal evidence. God used miracles, the most highly respected form of evidence available in their culture. He was rejected and killed despite the most undeniable evidence ever presented.
The apostles also suffered for their evidential testimony. They traveled great distances sharing the testimony of what they witnessed, and most of them suffered persecution and death for it. The resistance I receive from presuppositionalists is nothing in comparison, but I have paid a price in rude treatment and lost friendships. Intellectual integrity and devotion to God compel me to continue.
Presumptions Abound. In our quest for evidential truth, we must avoid many pitfalls. Presumption may be the most common and sneaky pitfall.
In religion, politics, and many others areas where people disagree, we tend to presume that we’ve discovered truth prematurely and with greater confidence than the evidence warrants. We find a bit of evidence or a nice sounding rationalization and assume we’ve discovered truth. It’s good to consider the implications of evidence and reason, but we need to keep in mind that many possible truths can be drawn from a limited set of evidence and rationalizations. A claim isn’t trustworthy unless it can be validated and verified with multiple evidences and/or reasonings. Sometimes we simply can’t validate or verify an idea. It's okay to accept what seems most likely true, but we need to be realistic about uncertainty. You can accept something as most likely true while avoiding dogmatic insistence that others believe it. We should also avoid taking unnecessary risks when uncertainty is high.
Elections provide a great example. Every year politicians claim their economic policies will make the economy grow while the policies of their opponents will lead to disaster. They usually have some evidence and rationalizations to support their opinions while denying the uncertainty that comes with the territory of complex economics. Our political leaders must execute some economic policy, so with every election I hope they don’t actually believe their rhetoric. Rather than gamble our nation’s future on a presumptuous policy, we usually implement a conservative spectrum of economic actions designed to maximize growth while managing risk. We implement untested ideas gradually to see how they work.
Illustrations, Metaphors, Analogies. Illustrations, metaphors, and analogies are great teaching tools. They help us understand concepts and ideas. Preachers and politicians often share illustrative stories or use analogies and motivational metaphors to influence people. These tools help people understand things and inspire people, but they carry no evidential weight. Critical thinkers should insist on evidence. We don’t want to trust our votes and souls to someone lacking evidence no matter how clearly and inspirationally they can express their ideas and opinions with illustrations, metaphors and analogies.
Maintaining Motivation, Finding Inspiration. So many things that motivate and inspire Christians have lost their excitement for me because they lack evidence. This challenge makes me wonder if evidentialism isn’t good for everyone.
I find plenty of motivation and inspiration from the fundamental truths strongly supported by evidence. The challenges of evidentialism also inspire me because I’m naturally motivated by challenge. I have a personality uniquely suited for evidentialism. I’m not sure God designed everyone to thrive spiritually with an evidentialist mindset. In fact, I’m quite sure most Christians will struggle if they get as deeply into it as I am.
The skeptical reflection required for critical thinking deflates confidence. Realistic acknowledgement of uncertainty deflates confidence. Most people need to feel confident to be inspired and motivated. Confidence killers tend to shut most people down.
I have a friend who’s entire motivation for faith seems to rest on the assurance that he’s going to heaven, not hell. He expresses his theology with dogmatic confidence. If I say “I think …” or “I believe …” in his presence he almost always follows my comment with some sort of “I know …” statement, professing to know things without a hint of doubt or uncertainty. These conversations usually involve highly uncertain theological or political ideology. When I present evidential support for his ideas he smiles, but doesn’t seem to care. His “knowledge” comes from presuppositional belief, not evidence. If I present evidence contrary to his expressed “knowledge” he becomes agitated. Sometimes he’ll abruptly end the conversation. This isn’t an isolated behavior. I see it in many people.
I’ve also had conversations with people who listen to evidence willingly, but I can see their motivation deflate. They get excited over analogies and stories offered without evidence simply because they feel they understand and they want to embrace understanding with confidence. When I present evidence related to the concept, even evidence supporting it, their enthusiasm wains. Evidential analysis simply isn’t inspiring for most people.
Somehow, the two need to go together. We should seek understanding first, but withhold enthusiasm until we have convincing evidence. Then we can embrace motivational stories, metaphors, etc., to inspire us.
________________________________
Evidentialism comes with other challenges, but complexity, dealing with presupposition, and finding inspiration seem to bring the biggest hurdles.