Interesting article. I suppose I would like to know how that story can possibly be verified? (Had to do it, although I would be interested in knowing whether this was reliable after all.)
I was thinking about pressupper argument that to have a working worldview human reason needs to posit a God. I see that this won't make God real unless we assume that what is rational is what is real.
This is like the ontological argument: human reason is dictating the world what exists. I think you are misunderstanding what you are doing.
Kant too presupposed God and freewill as "postulates of pratical reason" to have morality, but he never claimed that makes God real.
Again, we answered this under the "Sincere Offer..." post.
The presupp. argument *does not* **prove** God's existence.
It does show, however, that to assume reason, logic, etc., you must first assume Christian theism.
Thus, there can be no real logical/rational arguments against God's existence or for any worldview other than Christian theism since such arguments presuppose Christian theism.
mike, so it looks like the Christian apologist is in a pretty good place, apologetically. You've been granting that one has to assume the existence of the God of the Bible in order to be rational. Heck, I'll take that! :-)
Mike said: --- I was thinking about pressupper argument that to have a working worldview human reason needs to posit a God. ---
There is a simple solution for Mike. All Mike needs to do us provide "a working worldview" using "human reason" without "posit[ing] a God" and he will disprove his notion of presuppositionalism. So have at it Mike. Give us your working worldview that denies God.
(By the way, I also disagree with Mike's characterization of presuppositionalism, but that can be saved for another time.)
Interesting article. I suppose I would like to know how that story can possibly be verified? (Had to do it, although I would be interested in knowing whether this was reliable after all.)
ReplyDeleteOff-topic question again.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking about pressupper argument that to have a working worldview human reason needs to posit a God. I see that this won't make God real unless we assume that what is rational is what is real.
This is like the ontological argument: human reason is dictating the world what exists. I think you are misunderstanding what you are doing.
Kant too presupposed God and freewill as "postulates of pratical reason" to have morality, but he never claimed that makes God real.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteAgain, we answered this under the "Sincere Offer..." post.
The presupp. argument *does not* **prove** God's existence.
It does show, however, that to assume reason, logic, etc., you must first assume Christian theism.
Thus, there can be no real logical/rational arguments against God's existence or for any worldview other than Christian theism since such arguments presuppose Christian theism.
mike, so it looks like the Christian apologist is in a pretty good place, apologetically. You've been granting that one has to assume the existence of the God of the Bible in order to be rational. Heck, I'll take that! :-)
ReplyDeleteMike said:
ReplyDelete---
I was thinking about pressupper argument that to have a working worldview human reason needs to posit a God.
---
There is a simple solution for Mike. All Mike needs to do us provide "a working worldview" using "human reason" without "posit[ing] a God" and he will disprove his notion of presuppositionalism. So have at it Mike. Give us your working worldview that denies God.
(By the way, I also disagree with Mike's characterization of presuppositionalism, but that can be saved for another time.)