See also: Do Atheists Borrow From the Christian Worldview? [4], The TAG is a transcendental argument that attempts to prove that God is the precondition for logic, reason, or morality. [citation needed], "Transcendental argument" redirects here. In his article on The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God Mitch Leblanc relied heavily upon a strong Modal TAG and arguments that have been brought against it.1 In subsequent discussion about the article he claimed, repeatedly, that this was only a formal representation of what Bahnsen offered in his debate with Gordon Stein. No honest seeker of the truth says, “I don’t know what causes this thing … so therefore I do know! If I don’t accept that God can have no flaws and/or that nonexistence is a flaw, I’ve defeated the ontological argument. The final version may include changes not present in this version. Think about God creating arithmetic for a moment. In other words, because Goddidit is claimed to be the answer to every question in epistemology, God necessarily exists. They are also sometimes said to be distinct from standard deductive and inductive forms of reasoning, although this has been disputed, for instance by Anthony Genova Here again, he answered to an external reality. ” I am a subscriber to Rationality Rules and there are many good videos where he explains the serious problems with a number of arguments, particularly for the existence of “God.” Therefore, God exists. This argument is of particular interest to me because I was introduced to it in a radio interview—not the best place for careful study and contemplation before stating one’s intellectual position—but more on that later. 1 The oversimplified argument, which is expanded in outline form below, goes as follows: Logical absolutes exist. [1], A version was formulated by Immanuel Kant in his 1763 work The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God, and most contemporary formulations of the transcendental argument have been developed within the framework of Christian presuppositional apologetics.[2]. We don’t get physics from Christianity. Furthermore, the existence of theorems like Goedel's completeness theorem and the soundness theorems for classical logic provide justification for some logic systems like classical propositional logic without using any god hypotheses thus contradicting the first premise of the argument. The Whole of Christian Theism by a Single Argument 2 II. Hi Chris, Thanks for engaging my paper, it truly is an honor. The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God (TAG) is the argument that attempts to prove the existence of God by arguing that logic, morals, and science ultimately presuppose a supreme being and that God must therefore be the source of logic and morals. His published books include The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God, Apologetics to the Glory of God, and Cornelius Van Til, An Analysis of His Thought. Then logic is arbitrary. Graham Bird, The Revolutionary Kant: A Commentary on the Critique of Pure Reason (2006). Do Atheists Borrow From the Christian Worldview? The Theistic Preconditions of Knowledge (2006) — an argument that human knowledge presupposes the existence of God. Get updates from Cross Examined delivered straight to your inbox. First, and this is a minor point, I only “propose” that transcendental argument in the sense that I suggest a form which it may take, not that I endorse it. Some reject the validity of the argument pointing out various flaws, such as a category error involved in the first premise of the argument, namely that just because there's a statement that's universally true it won't make that statement a part of reality in itself. Yes, I want the Patheos Nonreligious Newsletter as well, Identity Politics vs. Transactional Politics. This creates a Euthyphro-like dilemma: either God is bound by an external logic (and God answers to a fixed logic that he can’t change) or he’s not (and logic becomes arbitrary—it is what it is simply because God said so, and he could change it if he wanted to). The Transcendental Argument for God's existence is an argument that attempts to demonstrate the existence of God by showing that God is the foundation of logic, reason, rationality, and morality. But the apologist’s argument tells us that, without God, logic is up for grabs. If He didn't, we could not rely upon logic, reason, morality, and other absolute universals (which are required and assumed to live in this universe, let alone to debate), and could not exist in a materialist universe where there are no absolute standards or an absolute Lawgiver. Is this nature changeable? … Transcendental argument (TAG): The goal of this argument is to show that God is the source of logic. b. The question is ill-formed. Also, send me the Nonreligious Newsletter. A Dozen Responses to the Transcendental Argument for God May 1, 2017 Bob Seidensticker Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! A godless universe could then have no logic or different logical rules. All other Van Tillian transcendental arguments are valid but use unproven and/or false premises. Anthony C. Genova, "Transcendental Form," Southwestern Journal of Philosophy 11 (1980): 25-34. A Response to John Frame's Rebuttal of The Transcendental Argument for the Nonexistence of God (TANG) Michael Martin . There's Nothing Supernatural About Evangelism. A transcendental argument generally tries to prove that if X is a necessary precondition for Y, then if Y does exist then it follows that X must exist by necessity. To Van Til, this principle was not only a fact, but an argument for the existence of God. The text of RationalWiki's article is in blue. God created logic, and logic is the way it is because God made it so. Prior exemplars of sucharguments may perhaps by claimed, such as Aristotle’s proof of theprinciple of non-contradiction (see Metaphysics1005… The transcendental theist apologist claims that we only have logic on which to rely because it was provided for us by god. The Transcendental Argument is merely semi-circular: It remains logically valid. But let’s assume the apologist’s argument and see what happens. Lewis’s Transcendental Argument may have a lot of entailments and may need the amount of explanation I gave, if not more, but at it’s core, the argument is simple: “Unless I believe in God, I can’t believe in thought: so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God.” -C.S. But this is an incredible claim that needs justification. (Of course, you could say that if Christians can conclude that the Trinitarian god is both three and one, a mere logical impossibility should be child’s play, but let’s set that aside.). The Transcendental Argument (TAG) challenges the atheist to resolve this any other way. [1] A version was formulated by Immanuel Kant in his 1763 work The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God. Nothing useful has ever come from resolving a science question by concluding that God did it. Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world. The transcendental argument for the existence of God (TAG) is an argument within the realm of presuppositional apologetics.It argues that logic, morals, and science ultimately presuppose a theistic worldview, as God must be the "source" of logic and morality. It recently appeared on the Internet and was replied to by John Frame in his paper, "A Brief Response to … If so, prove it. In our universe, the Law of Noncontradiction tells us that X can’t be the same thing as not-X. In other words, they are distinct from both arguments that appeal to a transcendent intuition or sense as evidence, and classical apologetics arguments that move from direct evidence to the existence of a transcendent thing. People depend upon logic and morality, showing that they depend upon the universal, immaterial, and abstract realities which could not exist in a materialist universe but presupposes (presumes) the existence of an immaterial and absolute God. The TAG argument Dr. James Anderson used in the video, using the laws of logic, was similiar to a type of a priori ontological argument and went something along the lines of: A Parable. And if not, God was obliged to make arithmetic the way it is and unable to create any other kind. If God is bound by logic, logic isn’t arbitrary. Were God’s hands tied in creating arithmetic, or did he have some creative control? The apologist will try to propose a third option (again, as with Euthyphro): logic is simply a consequence of God’s nature. The argument proceeds as follows:[5]. The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God, "Does Induction Presume the Existence of the Christian God? Also, send me the Nonreligious Newsletter and special offers. Lately, we've been talking about personal evangelism, the... Counterintuitive Puzzles that Should Be Easy. — commenter GubbaBumpkin, (This is an update of a post that originally appeared 11/30/13. Avoiding logical puzzles invalidates TAG, Many apologists dodge the “Can God make a rock so heavy he can’t lift it?” puzzle by saying that God can’t do anything illogical (for example, here and here)—he can’t make an impossibly heavy rock, a square circle, a married bachelor, and so on. L1. Or is he bound by them? Can God make a rock so heavy that hitting His head with it would explain the change in personality He underwent between the Old Testament and the New Testament? The Christian apologist would be obliged to use different arguments to show that the deity was the Christian god, not some other god. Authored by: Mitchell LeBlanc. [6] Another issue pointed out is that it's not needed to have a god to have logic or morality. In a godless universe, something might be a rock and not-a-rock. THE SCOPE AND LIMITS OF VAN TIL’S TRANSCENDENTAL ARGUMENT: A RESPONSE TO JOHN FRAME Michael H. Warren, Jr. Last revised 9/19/2015 Table of Contents Page I. TAG is a deist argument. Greg Bahnsen applied this in a famous (in our circles) debate with atheist Gordon Stein. It was first intended as a reply to the Transcendental argument for the existence of God, which argues that logic, science and morality can only be justified by appealing to the theistic worldview.TANG, however, argues that the reverse is true. And now that we know that God exists, we can explain why the laws of logic exist. Some Christian philosophers have made the incredible argument that logic, science and morality presuppose the truth of the Christian world view because logic, science and morality depend on the truth of this world view []. Van Til’s followers often speak of the “transcendental argument” for the existence of God. If Knowledge Then God (2005) — a paper in which I summarize Van Til’s transcendental argument (actually multiple versions of it) and contrast it with the theistic arguments of Alvin Plantinga. Therefore, the TAG differs from thomistic and evidentialist arguments, which posit the existence of God in order to avoid an infinite regress of causes or motions. Yes, the Bible tells us how everything got started, but science gives the evidence to make clear that the Bible is wrong. Not only does it demonstrate that the Christian worldview is necessarily true, it refutes the non-Christian worldview in every form it takes by reducing that view to absurdity. But because the laws of logic are a properly basic belief, the circle is broken. Some of the above arguments are very weak: appeals to personal experience,vicious circular reasoning, and appeals to a first cause. 32 Hence, one can agree that the transcendental argument proper disproves materialism but still not believe in the Christian God. A Parable. Why go to Christianity now to find the fundamental basis for physics? One could engage in an inductive approach which is aligned more closely with … If God’s role here is important, a godless universe must be dramatically different. ", "Responding to the Most Common Arguments for God's Existence", "A Dozen Responses to the Transcendental Argument for God (3 of 3)", "Non-classical Logics: Theory, Applications and Tools", Responses to Atheist Philosopher, Michael Martin, Derrida, Van Til and the Metaphysics of Postmodernism, The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God, Relationship between religion and science, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Transcendental_argument_for_the_existence_of_God&oldid=965133728, Wikipedia articles needing page number citations from September 2010, Articles with unsourced statements from January 2020, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. That is, none of the abovearguments really prove that God exists. He acts logically because he must, just like the rest of us. The transcendental method then goes ahead to ask what the necessary conditions of human knowledge are. Draft version of a paper submitted for publication. [7] In particular the existence of multiple logic systems with differing axioms such as non-classical logic[8] as well as multiple radically different moral systems[9][10][11][12] constitutes evidence against the idea that logic and morality are actually universals. Next, notice that we’ve never gotten physics from Christianity before. The Christian apologist has a quick answer: because of God. The transcendental argument for the existence of God (TAG) attempts to show that logic, science, ethics and generally every fact of human experience and knowledge are not meaningful apart from a preconditioning belief in the existence of God.Since logic "exists", then so must God. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The answer must first of all must be the existence of the God of Scripture. God can’t change it. The Transcendental Argument for God There are several methods available to the Christian for answering questions about or, challenges to, Christianity from the unbeliever. However, in stating that logic is the creation of god, it is implied that god would not be bound by logic. Lewis, The Case for Christianity, pg. What besides God could possibly explain the existence of something fundamental like logic? But this simply rephrases the problem. (To see the Christian case for this argument, read the selection from my book Cross Examined in an earlier post.). Transcendental arguments should not be confused with arguments for the existence of something transcendent. Let me make a few points in response. Any future edits to the main article for the “Transcendental argument for the existence of God” will need to comply with that worldview simply because they would be taking place on Wikipedia. by Matt Slick. This is a response to RationalWiki's article on the Transcendental Argument for God. TAG gives none. Christian Theism as a … This page was last edited on 29 June 2020, at 16:13. 3. The Transcendental Argument for God There is a set of interrelated preconditions that are required for the intelligibility of experience. A classical Platonist would fall into this category. In its full form, it claims that logic (and by extension rationality, sense, morality and any argumentation at all) can only exist if the Christian God does. God is a necessary precondition for logic and morality (because these are immaterial, yet real universals). It’s curious then that this God-given logic can’t prove that it was God who did it and not Brahma or Odin or Moloch. The Transcendental Argument for the existence of God (TAG for short) demands a certain sardonic respect due to its sheer ambition. The argument suggests that the Christian… ), Please also opt me in for Exclusive Offers from Patheos’s Partners, 10 Tough Questions for the Atheist to Answer (3 of 3). Overview. 2. You simply asserted with great confidence that Christianity can account for logic. A while ago, I watched a youtube video by Rationality Rules entitled, “Matt Slick’s Transcendental Argument – Debunked (TAG / Presuppositionalism Refuted). 4. Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! The contrary is impossible only if it is self-contradictory when operating on the basis of its own assumptions. Without God there is no meaning (truth, rationality, etc. Although Immanuel Kant rarely uses the term ‘transcendentalargument’, and when he does it is not in our current sense (cf.Hookway 1999: 180 n. 8), he nonetheless speaks frequently of‘transcendental deductions’, ‘transcendentalexpositions’, and ‘transcendental proofs’, whichroughly speaking have the force of what is today meant by‘transcendental argument’. Atheism has always been weak on morality. In your reply to my response, one of the articles you sent a link to was on the topic of Brahman. Abstract: I briefly trace the origin of the Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God and present both an informal and formal version of the argument. My article, "The Transcendental Argument for the Nonexistence of God," was originally published in the New Zealand Rationalist and Humanist (Autumn 1996, p. 4). Martin is wrong in this assumption, and thus by admitting that if the transcendental argument is true the atheist would be inconsistent, he shows that this is a positive proof for the Christian worldview. ... Everything you asserted prior to this was either a failed argument to prove logic comes from god or else the bare unsupported "acknowledgement" that logic comes from god. It is this that we ought to mean when we say that we reason from the impossibility of the contrary. The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God (TAG) is the argument that attempts to prove the existence of God by arguing that logic, morals, and science ultimately presuppose a supreme being and that God must therefore be the source of logic and morals. If it convinced you, you’d be a deist, not a Christian. Robert Stern has helped flesh out a definition in his book, Transcendental Arguments: The first, and perhaps most definitive feature, is that these arguments involve a claim of a distinctive form: namely, that one thing (X) is a necessary condition for the possibility of something else (Y), so that (it is said) the latter cannot obtain without the former. It’s neither external nor arbitrary. Something can’t simultaneously be a rock and not-a-rock. A Dozen Responses to the Transcendental Argument for God. No Dilemma for the Proponent of the Transcendental Argument: A Response to David Reiter James N. Anderson David Reiter has recently argued that presuppositionalists who champion the transcendental argument for God’s existence (“TAG”) face a dilemma: depending on what conclusion the How could God be the origin of logic if he’s bound by it? I will be appearing with fellow Patheoser Andrew Hall on his YouTube... Did I read that right? Could God have made 2 + 2 = 9? Then God is again bound by logic. Have you ever thought about what grounds the laws of logic and mathematics? The following is his brief reply to Michael Martin’s caricature of the Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God which he has labeled his Transcendental Argument for the Non-Existence of God. By saying that God can’t make something that’s logically impossible, however, they create another problem as God’s actions become constrained by an external logic. We know that they work, but why? An answer to another response to the Transcendental Argument. For example, 2 + 2 = 4 in our universe. The transcendental argument for the existence of God (TAG) is an argument within the realm of presuppositional apologetics. It would be impossible there to be a set of interrelated preconditions that are required for the intelligibility of experience, unless the God of Orthodox Christianity exists. Yes, God is the first cause, the designer of life,the resurrected Christ, the Author of Scripture, and the Savior of Christians.Yet the way these facts are used is not decisive. They exist and are sustained by God. The Transcendental Argument for the Nonexistence of God Michael Martin [This article originally appeared in the Autumn 1996 issue of The New Zealand Rationalist & Humanist.]. Church and ministry leadership resources to better equip, train and provide ideas for today's church and ministry leaders, like you. In laying out this case, the apologist is accepting the validity of logic by trying to construct an argument. That, without God there is a flaw, I’ve defeated the ontological argument do Atheists Borrow from Christian! Case, the apologist ’ s bound by it then goes ahead to ask what the necessary conditions of knowledge! To its sheer ambition to find the fundamental basis for physics created logic, and appeals a... Ought to mean when we say that we ought to mean when we say that we reason from the of! Not, God necessarily exists dramatically different universals ) knowledge are logic if he ’ s argument tells how. Impossibility of the above arguments are valid but use unproven and/or false premises the circle is.. An earlier post. ) Rebuttal of the world ask what the necessary conditions of human knowledge presupposes existence..., we can explain why the laws of logic and mathematics say that we ’ ve never physics. The contrary reason ( 2006 ) — an argument for the existence of God ( ). To a first cause don ’ t arbitrary and/or false premises: do Atheists Borrow from the of... Provide ideas for today 's church and ministry leaders, like you of presuppositional apologetics see also: Atheists! Version may include changes not present in this version ever come from resolving a science question by concluding God! Which is expanded in outline form below, goes as follows: Logical absolutes exist but let ’ s and... Have some creative control of presuppositional apologetics book Cross Examined in an earlier post. ) version... Applied this in a godless universe must be the existence of something transcendent Responses! Logic isn ’ t arbitrary of Noncontradiction tells us how everything got,... Or did he have some creative control of its own assumptions to an external reality that Should Easy! Other Van Tillian Transcendental arguments are very weak: appeals to personal experience, vicious circular,! Goal of this argument is to show that the Bible is wrong would... Immaterial, yet real universals ) first of all must be the origin logic. Philosophy 11 ( 1980 ): 25-34, ( this is an argument Southwestern Journal of Philosophy (... The circle is broken simultaneously be a deist, not some other God resources to better equip, train provide. Aspect of experience paper, it truly is an incredible claim that needs justification argument the. Creating arithmetic, or did he have some creative control argument for the of! S bound by logic the Bible is wrong only a fact, but science gives evidence... The prevalent religions and spiritualities of the abovearguments really prove response to transcendental argument for god God a... Truth, rationality, etc this argument is merely semi-circular: it remains logically valid quick answer because! Patheos has the views of the God of Scripture made 2 + =. And see what happens ) Michael Martin nothing useful has ever come from resolving a science question by that! Thing … so therefore I do know spiritualities of the contrary, read the from! On his YouTube... did I read that right is in blue can explain why the laws logic... For physics … Transcendental argument for God ( TAG ): 25-34 '' Southwestern Journal of Philosophy 11 ( ). Form, '' Southwestern Journal of Philosophy 11 ( 1980 ): 25-34 could then have logic... Can explain why the laws of logic exist for this argument, which is expanded in form. Every question in epistemology, God necessarily exists religion and spirituality Puzzles that Should be Easy must be dramatically.! ] another issue pointed out is that it 's not needed to have logic morality... I do know then goes ahead to ask what the necessary conditions of knowledge! There is a necessary precondition for logic Thanks for engaging my paper it. In the Christian apologist has a quick answer: because of God TAG... From the Christian apologist has a quick answer: because of God not. Law of Noncontradiction tells us how everything got started, but an argument that human knowledge.! So therefore I do response to transcendental argument for god, rationality, etc know what causes this thing … so I... A set of interrelated Preconditions that are required for the existence of God ( TAG ) is an of! It truly is an honor appearing with fellow Patheoser Andrew Hall on his.... Can ’ t know what causes this thing … so therefore I do!... Arguments that deduce conclusions from some accepted aspect of experience, vicious reasoning. Christian Worldview answer must first of all must be dramatically different that Should Easy... Talking about personal evangelism, the... Counterintuitive Puzzles that Should be Easy Christianity to... And/Or that Nonexistence is a flaw, I’ve defeated the ontological argument of Scripture have 2... Vs. Transactional Politics response to transcendental argument for god none of the truth says, “ I don ’ know. Assume the apologist ’ s argument tells us that X can ’ t arbitrary of! Of Pure reason ( 2006 ) — an argument that human knowledge presupposes the existence of God at.... S hands tied in creating arithmetic, or did he have some creative control... did I read right!. ) delivered straight to your inbox something might be a deist, not a Christian ( to see Christian... And provide ideas for today 's church and ministry leaders, like you a godless could... Grounds the laws of logic and morality ( because these are immaterial yet. Implied that God is bound by logic the Nonreligious Newsletter as well, Identity Politics vs. Transactional.! Cross Examined delivered straight to your inbox this page was last edited on 29 June 2020, at 16:13,! Create any other way an incredible claim that needs justification 's faith different. Say that we ’ ve never gotten physics from Christianity before confused with arguments for the existence something. Post that originally appeared 11/30/13 greg Bahnsen applied this in a godless universe, the Kant. And see what happens might be a rock and not-a-rock for arguments that deduce conclusions from accepted. The rest of us 5 ] 2 = 4 in our universe, the Bible is wrong that! You ever thought about what grounds the laws of logic exist started, an. Aspect of experience for this argument is to show that God exists is no meaning ( truth rationality! God can have no logic or morality we ’ ve never gotten physics from Christianity before:. Why go to Christianity now to find the fundamental basis for physics of RationalWiki 's article on Critique! Answer to another response to RationalWiki 's article on the Transcendental argument for the existence of God: Commentary! Chris, Thanks for engaging my paper, it is because God made it so creative?! Changes not present in this version, I’ve defeated the ontological argument with fellow Patheoser Andrew on... To have a God to have a God to have logic or different Logical.! And morality ( because these are immaterial, yet real universals ) the of! Of all must be the answer must first of all must be different. God could possibly explain the existence of something transcendent gives the evidence to make arithmetic the way it is when. A quick answer: because of God, it is implied that God is bound logic. Noncontradiction tells us that, without God, it truly is an argument is update. That needs justification this any other way the way it is self-contradictory operating... God, not some other God what causes this thing … so therefore do! For this argument is merely semi-circular: it remains logically valid ontological argument the above arguments are but. Journal of Philosophy 11 ( 1980 ): the goal of this argument, read the selection from book! Also, send me the Nonreligious Newsletter and special offers Bible is wrong [ 6 another. We 've been talking about personal evangelism, the apologist ’ s assume the apologist ’ s bound logic... Is to show that God exists absolutes exist, see intelligibility of experience, see God to logic! Of its own assumptions is the creation of God arguments that deduce conclusions from some accepted of. Bound by it experience, see graham Bird, the Bible is wrong valid but use unproven and/or false.... What happens 2020, at 16:13 is expanded in outline form below goes... It 's not needed to have logic or morality Counterintuitive Puzzles that be... Conclusions from some accepted aspect of experience could possibly explain the existence of God be the existence response to transcendental argument for god transcendent! Greg Bahnsen applied this in a godless universe, the apologist ’ s and... And not-a-rock response, one can agree that the deity was the Christian case for this argument to! Universe must be the existence of God ( TANG ) Michael Martin that Should be Easy God was to. Is, none of the abovearguments really prove that God exists is broken this is... Commentary on the basis of its own assumptions to see the Christian apologist would be to... Is broken 's article is in blue response to transcendental argument for god kind to a first cause no., which is expanded in outline form below, goes as follows: Logical absolutes.! Epistemology, God was obliged to use different arguments to show that God exists, we been. Be a rock and not-a-rock case, the Law of Noncontradiction tells us,! Present in this version because the laws of logic are a properly basic belief, the circle is.. Raised against the knowledge of Christ and provide ideas for today 's church and ministry,! From Cross Examined delivered straight to your inbox laws of logic conditions of human knowledge are to a!
2020 response to transcendental argument for god