Counterarguments to Presuppositional Apologetics | Chris - MO | Truth Wanted 02.13 

What reason is that?

@Auf RU-vid nicht an Politik interessiert Our Knowledge is based on the scriptures, which tells us that in Christ is found all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. This is not the correct view of Presuppositional apologist. We claim that Christ is the bases of all knowledge claim, and our question is simple, give us another bases for knowledge, ethics, and metaphysics that is consistent.

@Auf RU-vid nicht an Politik interessiert .....sooo... Do you have another base for knowledge or don't you. How do you come to know that Christian beliefs is a fairytale?

@Auf RU-vid nicht an Politik interessiert thank you for the explanation. So in order for something to be real, you need to see it, taste, touch, feel? That sums it up right?

@Auf RU-vid nicht an Politik interessiert no sir I'm not offended. Thanks for asking that. These are excellent questions I don't have a full thought out answer to. I'm assuming that you hold to an evolution view of human origin, and big bang theory (correct me if I'm wrong). Have you ever seen these theories play out before? Is it something you can test to see if it's true?

And logic is necessary for god to work... unless god is illogical.... LOL presuppositionalism

They want it to be "My god, therefore, logic" but it's really "(logic, therefore) my god, therefore, logic.

But they readily admit that they’re being circular because everything is circular. They’re just confusing themselves.

"“... you can’t know that logic is true unless god exists as that foundation” - assumes logic already exists...wrong God is the foundation. Logic is immaterial, how do materialists explain the foundation for logic? Evolved reason? So the law of non contradiction had to evolve?....lol

@@JMUDoc lmfao, well you're logically inept. God and nothing else existed until creation. Logic is simply a reflection of God's "preexisting" mind.

Really?..... Ok let go with the premiisses and conclusion of 1Romans 18 - 22. This proves there is no such thing as "atheism" and that they are merely suppressing their unbelief.

@@ShanqDad "Really?..... Ok let go with the premiisses and conclusion of 1Romans 18 - 22. This proves there is no such thing as "atheism" and that they are merely suppressing their unbelief." It asserts this; it does not prove it.

@@JMUDoc It clearly states the following........ 20"For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.". So are you asserting you "DO" have an excuse or that 1 Romans 20 "Doesn't actually say what it says?

@@ShanqDad I do have an "excuse": I really, truly, honestly do not know that the universe was created by a god. Romans is wrong. Don't believe me? Don't care.

@@JMUDoc the problem is you "SAY" you don't know but the way you live every day tells a different story. You live like the universe is being controlled, managed, and tended to and not like every thing could just fly apart chaotically!

With the watch argument I find the problem inherent in the argument of assumed design,above what you said, is that the premises misses its own argument. If it were looked at sensibly it is more thus You walk along a beach, a stone stands in the centre of the beach it has a rising piece at its own centre, and a few marks around the edge. Seeing this you assume it must be designed-It is after all a sundial, you ignore any flaws, you ignore that it may just be a naturally created object , so you assume a sundial and thus a designer-The sundial is us. Walking further you see a gold watch with intricate designs beyond any logical natural ability to produce, it has incredible detail internally and tells the time, tells the day, tells the year and month, it is the ultimate timepiece. You should therefore assume this watch always existed and had no designer. The watch is God. It is in recognising if we necessitate design and are flawed,limited,not supreme, that anything better than us is far more in need of design, that we can see there is no logic within assumed design.

Ancient people did not know the neurosciences, and some thought that joy came from the divine on high. The Hellenized Jew Philo of Alexandria (a contemporary of Paul the Apostle) believed that the Divine Word/Right Reason/Logos (a character derived from OT scripture, and Greek philosophy) poured down spiritual nourishment as a reward for righteous thoughts about God. Philo: ON DREAMS, THAT THEY ARE GOD-SENT Book 2 "XXXVII ...And *who can pour over the happy soul which proffers its own reason as the most sacred cup, the holy goblets of true joy, except the cup-bearer of God, the master of the feast, the Word* ?" ALLEGORICAL INTERPRETATION, III "LX ... *the soul very often, when it is delighted, is yet unable to explain what it is that has delighted it; but it is taught by the hierophant and prophet Moses, who tells it, “This is the bread, the food which God has given for the Soul,” explaining that God has brought it, his own Word and his own Reason; for this bread which he has given us to eat is this Word of his* ." Philo: ON FLIGHT AND FINDING "XXV *Those also who have inquired what it is that nourishes the soul, for as Moses says, “They knew not what it was,” learnt at last and found that it was the Word of God and the Divine Reason, from which flows all kinds of instinctive and everlasting wisdom. This is the heavenly nourishment* which the holy scripture indicates, saying, in the character of the cause of all things, “Behold I rain upon you bread from Heaven;” (Exo. 16:4) for in real truth it is God who showers down heavenly wisdom from above upon all the intellects which are properly disposed for the reception of it, and which are fond of contemplation. But those who have seen and tasted it, are exceedingly delighted with it, and understand indeed what they feel, but do not know what the cause is which has affected them; and on this account they inquire, “What is this which is sweeter than honey and whiter than snow?” And they will be taught by the interpreter of the divine will, that *“This is the bread which the Lord has given them to Eat.” (Exo. **16:15**) What then is this bread? Tell us. “This,” says he, “is the Word which the Lord has appointed.” This divine appointment at the same time both illuminates and sweetens the soul, which is endowed with sight, shining upon it with the beams of truth, and sweetening with the sweet virtue of persuasion those who thirst and hunger after excellence* ." Philo: ALLEGORICAL INTERPRETATION, II "XXI ... *who brought forth for thee out of the hard rock a fountain of water, who fed thee with manna in the desert, which thy fathers knew Not?* ” (Deut. 8:15-16) ...Moreover, the soul falls in with a scorpion, that is to say, with dispersion in the wilderness; and the thirst, which is that of the passions, seizes on it until *God sends forth upon it the stream of his own accurate Wisdom, and causes the changed soul to drink of unchangeable health; for the abrupt rock is the Wisdom of God, which being both sublime and the first of things he quarried out of his own powers, and of it he gives drink to the souls that love God; and they, when they have drunk, are also filled with the most universal manna; for manna is called something which is the primary genus of every thing. But the most universal of all things is God; and in the second place the Word of God* . Philo's Divine Word has many attributes (just a few of them summarized below) including being anointed as well as having a father (God), and a mother (Divine Wisdom). www.iep.utm.edu/philo/ Philo: THE SPECIAL LAWS, I "XVI ...Now *the image of God is the Word, by which all the world was made* ...." Philo: ON DREAMS, THAT THEY ARE GOD-SENT "XXXVII ...For there are, as it seems, two temples belonging to God; one being this world, in which the *high priest is the Divine Word, his own firstborn son* ." Philo: ON FLIGHT AND FINDING "XX ...For we say that the high priest (Jos. 20:1-6) is not a man, but *is the Word of God, who has not only no participation in intentional errors, but none even in those which are involuntary* . For Moses says that he cannot be defiled neither in respect of his father, that is, the mind, nor his mother, that is, the external sense; "He shall not go where there is a dead body; he shall not defile himself even for his father or mother." (Lev. 21:11) because, I imagine, he has received imperishable and wholly pure parents, *God being his father, who is also the father of all things, and Wisdom (Greek Sophia personified feminine wisdom Prov. **3:13**-20, 8:1-36) being his mother, by means of whom the universe arrived at creation* ; and also because *he is anointed with oil, by which I mean that the principal part of him is illuminated with a light like the beams of the sun* , so as to be thought worthy to be *clothed with garments. And the most ancient Word of the living God is clothed with the word as with a garment, for it has put on earth, and water, and air, and fire, and the things which proceed from those elements* . ...Nor will he “rend his clothes;” (Lev. 21:10) for *the Word of the living God being the bond of every thing, as has been said before, holds all things together, and binds all the parts, and prevents them from being loosened or separated* ." Who would believe that the OT, and NT are revelations from an omnipotent/omnipresent being except a thought addict via the *Holy Dopamine Ghost* (Dopamine Reward System). The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text users.cecs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/CohenArt/#8a Dr. Ehrman "Forged" archive.org/stream/BartD.Ehrman-ForgedWritingInTheNameOfGod-WhyTheBiblesAuthors/Forged_djvu.txt Dr. Ehrman "Misquoting Jesus" archive.org/stream/Prof.BartEhrman-MisquotingJesus/BartD.Ehrman-MisquotingJesus_djvu.txt i.imgflip.com/1ydvtk.jpg skepticsannotatedbible.com

i used to take lsd, many times i would congratulate myself on being brave enough to leave the flat to go to the toilet, and looking out the window while i pee'd i would reflect on how beautiful the river and the forest outside the window was, i did this quite a few times until i realised there was no river or forest, just the underpass for the dual carriageway that reflected the lampost light in the rain.

"Anything that isn't an argument between facts is just statement/assertion." Is that a fact?

You do not seem to be a shining example of understanding.

Harry Nicholas I’m curious as to why you would watch a video on presuppositionalism if you’re not (as you seem not to be) interested in the details

He has done so many times. He is quite famous.

It's not an argument. It's a set of assertions.

We can presuppose that it's bad.

God is knowledgeable, so he sets a foundation of knowledge without extraneous effort.

Only if that thing exists, which it does not.

Says the fallible human, again.

@Pisstake How about stating an argument instead of just blurting out vulgarity? Again: Logic is God's property. Thanks for your time!

Logic and trustworthiness are God's personal properties.

You wrote: "...the logic it developed...." What on earth is that supposed to mean?

@@1godonlyone119 It means nothing. That is the point. Logic is a way of thinking about things. It is not the sort of thing that comes from some entity as a source--nor is logic a "property" of something.

@@greense65 Nothing you say means anything, obviously, you moron. Again: Logic and trustworthiness are God's personal properties.

It’s the assertion king…..

Gods are a bad idea made up by primitive, ignorant people and propagated via indoctrination, threats with torture, and weak false promises, that only appeal to the unthinking and desperate.

Assertion

Gods are an “eternally” existing, foul smelling bad idea.

And you know this how?

@Auf RU-vid nicht an Politik interessiert Yes, but I wanted to address theists and focus on the one issue - is a mind required for things to behave logically

@Auf RU-vid nicht an Politik interessiert You may find that Presuppositionalists attempt this circular reasoning: A supposed logical argument to prove that their version of god is required for logic to work.

No you get called out on what you say to back it up and then you run away and lie. You claim you’ve proven your system is correct. So then do it now……

Here’s one where you made claims and didn’t back them up…..

Mass murder and eternal torture are god's personal hobbies. It is the ultimate douchebag.

Says the fallible human.

Why should I care what the Bible says?

According to the book you're quoting, your god approves of Slavery and the raping of women & children. May history have mercy on your name.

@@Vinciini83 According to you world view rape and slavery are only immoral if society deems it so. We are no more or less than a collection of biological mass that has no inherent value or purpose. Just because the social norms that affect our minds trigger an emotional response to rape and slavery in no way make them objectively immoral.. The best argument you can come up with is that rape and slavery are not beneficial to our species.

@@josephvega1161 Well then, since you already agree that your god condones slavery, and the raping of women & children, how is my "world-view" at all relevant?

My book says your book is wrong.