[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 28 KB, 499x481, EnDewUSUwAEbG0a.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18028359 No.18028359 [Reply] [Original]

>be me
>lit tells me the best argument for God is presuppositional apologetics
>read Greg Bahnsen
>tells me that the christian worldview is the only worldview that can account for Truth
>defines Truth as that which comports to the mind of the triune God
>close book
Presuppositionalism is absolute rhetorical sophistry. Are there any books that argue for the existence of god that aren't sophistry? It would be pretty cool if God existed but Presup is retarded.

>> No.18028555
File: 115 KB, 750x1000, C12C3EF9-FD29-4236-8C41-17EB3D20095E.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18028555

>>18028359
>>defines Truth as that which comports to the mind of the triune God

>> No.18028636

>>18028359
>>defines Truth as that which comports to the mind of the triune God
You’d have to be retarded to deny this

>> No.18028731

>>18028636
You can't say that non-christians can't account for truth then define truth as that which comports to the mind of the triune God. Presuppositionalism tries to use reason and logic to demonstrate the insufficiency of those things to justify themselves. It's like trying to use your eyes to look behind your head you can't do it.

>> No.18028827

>>18028731
>You can't say that non-christians can't account for truth then define truth as that which comports to the mind of the triune God
They can’t *account* for it, because they deny the triune God

>> No.18028836

>>18028827
>They can’t *account* for it, because they deny the triune God
You defined it in a way that they can't.

>> No.18029130
File: 23 KB, 98x120, Extra_life_02.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18029130

>>18028359
The best argument for God is killing yourself. If you have faith in an afterlife kill yourself and prove it to me.

>> No.18029173

>>18029130
what's the rush?

>> No.18029180

>>18029130
But then the babes would be deprived of getting to know me, and that would be a travesty.

>> No.18029189

>>18028359
what does presuppositional apologetics have to do with God lmao

>> No.18029208

>>18029173
the longer the wait the smaller the sacrifice.

>> No.18029390

>>18029189
It argues for the existence of god.

>> No.18029450

Here are some actual good arguments / proofs.

https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-writings/existence-nature-of-god/does-god-exist1/

>> No.18029452

>>18029390
/lit/ trolled you.

>> No.18030534

>>18029452
This

>> No.18031632

the best argument is the hard problem of consciousness and mystical experiences imo. but even those have problems

>>18029450
>God is the best explanation why anything at all exists
a neccesary being is improbable since whatever neccesitates it needs to be neccesary too and so on. if it neccesitates itself, then other things can also neccesitate themselves. some of them could be irrational and neccesitate themselves irrationally. if there are other things, then the being isnt the only neccesary one.
>God is the best explanation of the origin of the universe
causality exists within the universe. why expect it to hold for the universe itself? also what caused causality? why would god cause causality first and then cause things through causality?
>God is the best explanation of the applicability of mathematics to the physical world
maths is already derived from the physical world. and even then we know that maths cant explain reality one to one since no new information can enter the system in maths but there is information irl. in both systems, the information has to be inserted from outside the system. this is kind of like an evidence for god, but of a god outside of the bounds of logic and neccesityi wich apologetics dont like
>God is the best explanation of the fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life.
puddle of mud thinks its hole is fine tuned for it
>God is the best explanation of intentional states of consciousness.
illusory
>God is the best explanation of objective moral values and duties
illusory
>The very possibility of God’s existence implies that God exists
>maximally great
doesnt mean limitlessly great or infinitely great. and "great" here means nothing. existence doesnt make something more "great". similar sophistry to OPs complaint. plus the argument holds for the existence of whatevers the opposite of god.

>> No.18031673

>>18031632
>maths is already derived from the physical world
Not even close to anything resembling truth, you mong.