The Transcendental Argument for God (TAG) is a philosophical argument, mainly developed by the late Gregory Bahnsen, and developed for the layperson in Dr. Jason Lisle's recent book The Ultimate Proof of Creation. Dr. Lisle promotes the argument as being philosophically impregnable--irrefutable. This argument is by no means successful in all situations. It will not work on opponents who are especially stubborn or ignorant. An opponent must be intelligent enough to understand that he has been defeated, and honest enough to admit that he has no refutation to the transcendental argument. That noted, against open-minded intellectuals, this argument is a devastating counter to any claim of morality, logic, or uniformity coming from a critic.
35 comments
It fails to mention how Gobs fights sin and Thor fights frost monsters.
You've seen sin, right? Now, have you seen any frost monsters around?
The TAG is a fallacious piece of shit.
"That noted, against open-minded intellectuals, this argument is a devastating counter to any claim of morality, logic, or uniformity coming from a critic."
Argument for god(s) or Swiss Army knives ? You decide !
Iron Chariots
The argument that only the open-minded intellectuals get. You want to be an open-minded intellectual don't you? Reminds me of the garments visible only to the wise.
How low can they go at the Creation"wiki"...
First of all, as far as I can see, TAG is based on assumptions. Do you know what's the problem with assumptions? If at least one is wrong, then an entire argument falls into water.
The sun is actually blue with pink polka dots and I know it because a magical being told me. You should admit it, unless you are especially stubborn or ignorant. An opponent must be intelligent enough to understand that he has been defeated, and honest enough to admit the truth of the real colours of the sun!
Oh buggeration! Only intelligent people can appreciate the evidence for Bible God! Blast! I was so looking forward to it.
Oh well! I suppose I and the millions of ordinary people who are not intelligent enough will have to go on being atheists.
Or:-
Tail-wagging droolation and yipitee-i-o when open-minded itellectuals = gullible idiots with plenty of space between their ears to store Jason's rancid slops.
Sure it's Lisle! Anyone who calls their book the Ultimate Proof and goes on at some length about how irrefutable he is can only be an arrogant, self-centered dickweed talking about himself. And Jason is the very image of an arrogant, self-centered dickweed.
Prove objective morality exists, and we'll measure it against Yahweh to see if he is the only one who could create it. Since the Holocaust being bad is one proof that gets brought up a lot, I think we can agree that objective morality says you shouldn't inflict agony on Jews, gays, and Communists simply for them not conforming to what you want, yes?
The laws of logic are a description of how the universe works and are based on observation. Demonstrate that they don't work, and they will be discarded, same as any scientific law. By contrast, no creationist will ever give any scenario that would make them admit they are wrong.
Since you presumably believe in a Yahweh who is very involved in the world, you have to account for uniformity, not I. You have to explain why plate tectonics can explain earthquakes better than asking which gay guy Yahweh is whining about this week. You have to explain why psychology can cure mental illnesses better than exorcism/deliverance. If there is a supernatural being who can and often does manipulate or outright subvert natural laws, uniformity is not what you expect.
Opens the page to see what the TAG is. I think I can fix their argument:
> If the Biblical Worldview is correct, then it is impossible to know anything. We know this is so because anything you think you know, God could simply change it.
(From a different computer)
Ah, poisoning the well. "It will not work on opponents who are especially stubborn or ignorant."
Anytime someone starts out their argument by basically calling you names if you disagree with them, I know it can't be a good argument.
Here's the problem with the TAG. While they still have the same running script, people who familiarize themselves with it, learn it and then can counteract such drivel. Users of TAG can't answer simple questions regarding their argument because in reality don't know what their argument really is.
Developed for the layperson in Dr Jason Lisle's recent book? Who the heck listens to what that dolt has to say?
The argument is irrefutable, but not successful in all situations?
"An opponent must be intelligent enough to understand that he has been defeated, and honest enough to admit that he has no refutation to the transcendental argument."
"Kejserens nye Klæder" - Hans Christian Andersen
The Emperor is naked.
God nat
Guten Tag
Buh-bye!
"Everything I say is the absolute truth, because I say so, and if you disagree then you are just not being honest!"
So this is a philosophical argument invented by 2 year olds.
Unfortunately, the TAG strategy runs up against a wall when trying to connect it to any one specific deity. It can apply equally to all of them, and not specifically to one, which means it is useless.
For every philisophical argument that supports TAG there's another that refutes it, and that's without introducing personal philophosies. Marxism, people, for one.
I really wish some phd of philophosy would commit some time to exposing these frauds like Lively, Bahnsen and W.L.Craig. There are thousands of philophocies and even the established (mostly logical and upheld over time) aren't absolutes of fact or even the proven norm.
This current wave of hauling philophocal arguments into Christianity is just a different tact on the old method of stealing concepts from other belief systems.
@Warren McIntosh pointed out
"If this argument is irrefutable proof of god, why does it work equally well for the flying spagetti monster?"
Exactly, or even the Roman Pantheon that existed along with Greek/Roman philophocies. The Wiccans,so-called Satanists or scientologists of today could find many that support their beliefs and rituals.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
