Often Christianity is criticized by its critics for bringing assumptions by which it views the world. Scholarly method, according to many critics, unlike Christianity has no assumptions.
It is of course a secularized view of Descartes' mythology which glorifies in the human ability to know all. The irony is that increasingly most thinkers in their disciplines acknowledge that it is impossible to have any semblance of rational thought without assumptions. However, rarely is this realization ever acknowledged in the secular battle against religion.
Naturalism and evolution are viewpoints with assumptions. You will find many who claim that the case many expound against God is fully rational and has no assumptions of its own but there are innumerable assumptions these positions have.
The point of this is not to examine the assumptions of Christianity and secular method but simply to encourage Christians to not feel the field is being played fairly. Often the secular method demands far more in way of proof from Christianity than it requires of itself.
At times it argues that the secular viewpoint is "simpler" and should be the "default viewpoint" and thus the "burden rests on religion." Whatever the case, often the argument is played on terms stacked against religion.
If secular viewpoint required of its own views the rigor it often requires of Christianity (that there be not a single assumption) it would have to admit that it has many viewpoints and assumptions which it begins with. For those who believe in God it is important to remember in discussions with those who expound secular worldview that often the world refuses to give religion a rational consideration.