# The Transcendental Nature of Logic?



## RamistThomist (Aug 5, 2004)

Paul,
This question was brought before Bahnsen in the Stein Debate. "Why can't we just assume the transcendental nature of logic instead?" I don't have my tapes on me so I can't remember what Bahnsen said. Anyway, I think this would be someone's first respeonse to TAG.

Regards


----------



## crhoades (Aug 5, 2004)

If we're allowed starting points by just assuming them then why can't we assume to start with God's existence instead of having to "prove" it? If the atheist asks for a proof for God's existence we have to turn the table and ask for a foundation or a justification for the unbelievers toolkit. The great thing is is that they don't have one without borrowing our capital. 

Now hopefully Paul will chime in with some cool quotes and more eloquence than that!!


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 5, 2004)

Thanks Paul,
I am a presuppositionalist but I am still learning. I guess the best way sometimes is to play devil's advocate. I wasn't tryin to attack presupp in my two posts, just addressing common objections that people raise against me.

Again, thanks a bunch


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Aug 5, 2004)

So what if you're debating an atheist who doesn't believe logic is universal but just a convention? I've been chatting with one, who though he acknowledges that his worldview can't account for logic, morality, or the uniformity of nature, yet states that he doesn't have to give account for them. He feels that we just do the best we can where ever we are. Complete nonsense to me. But it makes sense to him somehow. Now I know that he is blinded so that he refuses to conced to the biblical view on these things. I'm surprised that he even still talks with me about these things, but God keeps giving me open doors with him, so who knows what may come of it later.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Aug 5, 2004)

Thanks Paul. It's interesting really. We have these discussion in front of other coworkers who sometimes chime in. One in particular is an agnostic who agrees with all my arguments except he wishes to replace the "Christian" God with some agnostic version of God. I of course took him to task for that since he can't have it both ways. What I've noticed using the TA along with other arguments, is that it's amazing to see the hardness of heart in people, when even after they have been stripped of all their arguments, they still refuse to believe. How far we have fallen... Praise God for his mercy to such as me!


----------

