Any conversation assumes the ability of all involved parties to think and reason. Without this assumption, any dialogue would be meaningless. Yet, on what grounds do we even make such an assumption? Are we justified in this assumption? Note here that should someone say we are not justified in this assumption, this one must assume the same in order to make the contrary argument. It would seem to be a viscious circle. We can't argue anything without assuming that people can think.

Where does the ability to think come from? Naturalists must assume that this ability is a product of mere brute natural forces with no overarching intelligence behind it. Since matter is all there is, in the naturalist view, then thinking is just the result of chemical reactions in the brain. All of it evolved from non-intelligent, unguided processes.

Consider the consequence of such a position. If there is no super intelligence behind the ability to think and reason, then how can they be sure that they can even think properly? If evolution is responsible for thinking, then we have unintelligent, unguided mutations to thank for our ability to reason. Yet a question begs to be asked: how can they be sure that their brains, and the thought patterns resulting from natural chemical reactions, evolved properly? How can they be sure that they are perceiving the world correctly? Take note again: if they wish to answer this point, they will have to assume what needs to be proved; i.e., that they can indeed think and reason correctly. While they charge theists with arguing in circles, they are locked in a few circles of their own.

Is it all that unreasonable to accept the view that our ability to think and reason comes from an Intelligent Designer? Will we not be on a better foundation if we understand that thinking is not just a result of brute natural forces, but rather a result of a God-given ability? Theism bases its arguments on this very point. If there is no God, then there is no foundation for proper thinking. I am not willing to trust the ability to reason to naturalistic presuppositions, for these presuppositions face some insurmountable problems.

Thinking is the result of intelligence. Intelligence does not arise from non-intelligence. That would seem to be an axiomatic point, but apparently the atheist does not think so. I would submit, however, that the atheist assumption is unbearable. If any of us desire to have confidence in the ability to think and reason, we ought to start with God. His existence explains not only the universe, but the mind.

So, where does your thinking begin?

"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge" (Proverbs 1:7).