[ 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: 133 KB, 960x720, 0E7A03EF-82C8-4309-A9D0-562A186F9CE7.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18508308 No.18508308[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

What do you guys think of the transcendental argument for god as popularised by Jay Dyer? Is he right in presenting it as the best Christian apologetic method in opposition to Thomism and evidentialism? Also what are the best and worst arguments for god in your view?

>> No.18508323

>trinity
>logical

>> No.18508359

>>18508308
There are some arguments for God that reasonable thinkers can find compelling, but this is pure garbage. The graphical presentation is tasteless too.
t. atheist

>> No.18508381

>>18508323
It’s ‘supra-rational’

>> No.18508396

>>18508308
>Christian god already exists so I don't have to prove anything that's my argument
Wow very cool. I'm sure the pope will send you a title to collect rent from Latin peasants

>> No.18508504

>>18508308
>do _not_ make sense in the absence of god
Just wrong.

>> No.18508553

>>18508323
>>18508359
>>18508381
>>18508396
>>18508504
Not an argument.

>> No.18508569

>>18508553
Neither is the op image

>> No.18508646

>>18508553
lmao imagine thinking OP deserves any more consideration than a simple "I reject your retarded premise"

>> No.18508655

>>18508569
>>18508646
You don't actually understand the argument.

>> No.18508678

>some kind of divine consciousness is the source and guarantor of rationality and morality
Okay
>this has to be YHWH 2.0 and not Allah because reasons
Nope

>> No.18508713

>>18508655
Neither do you, because it's pure nonsense. Even ignoring the insane premises, if you think 1 and 2 entail 3, you seriously need to take your meds.

>> No.18508770

>>18508713
Actually look into the argument before embarassing yourself further please.

>> No.18508795

>>18508770
>Y-YOU NEED TO DO MORE RESEARCH
The last refuge of someone who is losing. Make your adversary do the work so they waste time and energy. Eat shit.

>> No.18508815

>>18508795
retard.

>> No.18508820

>>18508815
You too

>> No.18508828

>>18508770
I just did. You probably took the first thing from google images that said "TAG" without reading it like the retard you are. Because it sure as fuck does not even resemble what Kant was trying to do.

>> No.18508854

>>18508308
>The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God (German: Der einzig mögliche Beweisgrund zu einer Demonstration des Daseins Gottes) is a book by Immanuel Kant, published in 1763, in the earlier period of his philosophy which he later saw as "dogmatic slumber."
And OP's pic is a retarded distortion of Kant's argument to fit the worldview of some schizo Christian apologetic.

>> No.18508871

>>18508308
What are his justifications for 1) and 2)?
Also what about trinitary religions that do not strictly conform to Christianity (like Pythagoric, Platonic and Neoplatonic mysticism, for example)?

>> No.18508900
File: 571 KB, 686x720, 1621681116015.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18508900

>>18508308
>Dude, what if jesus created all existence!?!?
>then the atheists would be btfo, omegalol!!!
>fuck those cringe fedoratippers, har har! and the towelheads too lmao!

>> No.18508923
File: 201 KB, 940x940, kant2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18508923

Retarded because Transcendental Idealism already gave grounding to logic as a the necessary rules of experience and cognition rather than rules of things in themselves.

>> No.18508932

>>18508678
Explain why the existence of Logic, even if I accept this NECESSARILY DEMANDS the existence of God and specifically the Christian God as a necessary condition.

>> No.18508942

>>18508923
Is this way Kant applied the categories of Quantity, Negation, Limitation, Causality, Community, Possibility and Existence to noumena?

>> No.18508953

>>18508932
You misread, I was saying even if it does prove a kind of philosopher's God there's a massive leap of logic to get to the Christian one. I don't find it very persuasive.

>> No.18508998

>>18508308
>the triune god of the bible
LMAO

>> No.18509009

>>18508308
Kalam argument is better, this argument is shit

>> No.18509097

>>18508942
Is this why*

>> No.18509338

>>18508308
>dude if you assume god exists then people who think otherwise are wrong
Anon is smoking that good shit.

>> No.18511483

ITT: no one understanding tag

>> No.18511724

Why did jay present tag as orthodoxy’s official apologetical method in his recent debate with the Muslim lol