I wanted to share some of the philosophical arguments for the existence of God that compel me the most. Click to view Part 1 and Part 2.
The Transcendental Argument. This argument primarily comes out of the work of Cornelius Van Til and other presuppositional apologists, and I find it to be incredibly powerful. I think it goes much deeper than a lot of the other arguments for God’s existence.
The argument says that knowledge, intelligibility, the uniformity of nature, the laws of logic, and so forth are possible only within a theistic worldview. On an atheistic, naturalistic worldview, all we are is matter in motion. The reason we are able to have knowledge, use language intelligibly, and even dialogue at all is because God exists and God has created us in His image. If God does not exist, then we are not that much different than soda cans that fizz. All it’s doing is fizzing, and not using any intelligibility or rationality, because it is just matter in motion. Thus, when the atheist speaks against God, Cornelius Van Til compared it to the little girl sitting on her dad’s lap, and slapping him. The little girl is only able to slap him, because she is supported on her dad’s lap.
Why believe in God, Philosophical Theology, Philosophy of Religion, Transcendental Argument, Theistic Arguments, Reformed Theology, Presuppositional Apologetics, Covenantal Apologetics, Evangelical Philosopher, Cornelius Van Til, John Frame, Scott Oliphint
649 total views, 1 views today
And thus the atheist who is merely matter cannot trust his own thoughts because after all they are chemicals firing a certain way. Right? It is fairly difficult to maintain a transcendent human will in a materialist worldview or am I seeing this too simplistically and unfairly? I want to be fair to the other side in understanding their positions. I appreciate the opportunity to think about these things with you. I hope you don’t mind me using this forum for that purpose. Thank you
Yes, that’s right! By employing logic, language, rationality, etc, the atheist is in fact adopting/presupposing Christian theism in order to maintain his/her opposition to God. One Christian thinker put it this way, it’s as though the atheist borrows the car of Christian theism, and then tries to drive it into a tree.
My pleasure to be able to think through these things with you!
Comments are closed.