The essay critiques presuppositionalism in Christian apologetics, focusing on its central claim of “borrowing” from other ideologies. It highlights logical fallacies, such as begging the question and special pleading, as inherent to this framework. Presuppositionalism’s rejection of intellectual neutrality undermines genuine dialogue and fails as a persuasive method. The analysis reveals that engaging with its arguments leads to an impasse, necessitating a broader evaluation of competing worldviews instead.