Belief in God is the only logical worldview
Apologists can argue that logic depends on the existence of God:
- "However, laws of logic are not material. They are abstract and cannot be experienced by the senses. [...] When people use laws of logic, they have confidence in something they cannot actually observe with the senses; this is a type of faith. When we have confidence that the universe will operate in the future as it has in the past, we are acting on faith.[...] The law of non-contradiction stems from the nature of the biblical God. [...] Therefore, when the unbeliever applies the law of non-contradiction, he is implicitly standing upon the Christian worldview.[...] So not only is the Christian worldview logical, it is the only worldview that is ultimately, consistently logical. "
- "The Christian worldview alone adequately explains and accounts for the laws of logic. "
- "In the words of the late Greg Bahnsen, the most basic proof of Christianity is that if it were not true, it would be impossible to prove anything at all. If the non-Christian worldview is true, the laws of logic are not valid. Therefore, even though non-Christians use logic to interpret evidence, they have no real justification for doing so. In the non-Christian worldview, logic is not something that can be trusted."
The argument is basically a form of transcendental argument.
Most of the premises of these arguments are unsupported, or supported with scriptural arguments, which the skeptic does not accept.
Even if an apologist refutes the specific world view of their debate opponent, they do not attempt to justify their assertion that all other world views are inadequate. Therefore, this is an unsupported premise. There may be multiple foundations of logic for all we know.
Formal logic is not something that requires an transcendent explanation. It is simply a set of principles that logicians find useful. There are many alternative logical systems (known as non-classical logic).