Why don't Christians, or theists in general, understand what they are using is redundancy (e.g., 'X god') as an axiom for truths. Why do they not comprehending identities? Is this indicative of lower IQ, or are they genetically inferior in conceiving such basic inferential conclusions?
Transcendental argument is cope
Cope about what?
didn't read or understand what i've post
proves my point of low IQ
muzzoid nigger faggot sloppily strings a sentence together and thinks he’s god lmao. go debate jay dyer, faggot nerd.
muzzoid nigger faggot sloppily strings a sentence together and thinks he’s god lmao. go debate jay dyer, faggot nerd.
cannot refute what I've said kek, too low IQ, and relies on a faggot talking head to defend their cope kek
eat my shit or you are low IQ
If you want an intellectual battle then play me in chess.
faggot debate is beneath me. I prefer muzzoid trash to burn in hell personally.
The transcendental argument is just about making an axiom or using a redundant one, that’s literally it. It’s even laughable, because you can’t really defend it without relying on Jew Dyer. And the argument can be used in any framework, not just the Christian one, even a Hindu jeet religion, or someone from any jungle mumbo religion, could use it against you. If you claim "X god" is the axiom for everything but don’t realize that any framework could do the same, then what’s the point? For example, someone could say a banana is the axiom for everything, or a dog is the axiom, or literally any religious framework that exists today. Don’t you see it’s an argument for slow boys and dumbasses? It’s just using redundancy to explain axioms. So if God (redundancy) is necessary for these truths to exist, then why can’t those truths just be axioms themselves?
broken unintelligible ESL
Why don't you understand?
slow boys cope KEK
The Transcendental Argument means you can't know anything because in your worldview your thoughts are just chemical reactions. You are in a pitch black room, feeling things with your hands, and trying to describe what it is. You think you reasoned up with Big Bang, but really you're just reverting to Kike fairy tales. We believe God is over all, is the anchor for beliefs we hold, and provides the lightswitch to the dark room.
Religions are totalitarian sects that came to power by bloody struggle and then rewrote history to suit themselves. Arguing with the doctrine of the faith is pointless, it is the same as disproving Yakub or arguing with Aum Shinrikyo cultists.
Study history and all this transcendent bullshit will be out of your head as soon as you realize that the early Christians are literally Al Qaeda.
You are insane.
We believe God is over all, is the anchor for beliefs we hold, and provides the lightswitch to the dark room.
NIGGER You are special pleading. If you think every inferential conclusion is flawed because human inference is flawed but make an exception for your 'X god,' then you are literally coping. This again proves my point that all of you are low IQ
It's not an exception, it's the explanation of how one side can KNOW and the other side CAN NOT KNOW.
kys
it's the explanation of how one side can KNOW and the other side CAN NOT KNOW.
COPE. proves my point again too low IQ, how is reasoning process about God any different from a belief system based on other things? you are literally special pleading like a little child
pol is a downsyndrome board
clucky KANG!!! CLUCKIE KAAAANG!!
Inheriting tradition is not reasoning. And I already pointed out that you did not reason your way to Big Bang, but inherited it, as tradition, from some schizo kikes before you.
They have nothing else, so that have to try to convince people that transcendentals exist. Which they can't do.
Otherwise they'd have to talk about the Bible, and there's two problems with reading the Bible. First, they haven't read it. Second, they'd need to run failed apologetics for all the horrific shit in their dumb book.
Note: Islam is no better. Judaism is no better.
atheists are following da j00s
meanwhile please ignore da j00s that wrote my holy book
It's a simple Epistemic argument. Hilarious how it breaks you guys.
You'd need to prove that all other worldviews can't, by going through them all. Which you can't and won't.
You still don't get it. Hilarious.
Prove that transcendentals exist. It requires no interviewing of my or my worldview to do so.
That's not proving that the Christian worldview is the only worldview that can account for knowledge.
Now you have two things to prove.
Stop dodging, and start proving.
You literally do not even understand the issue. Lol
Epistemic argument
circular and cope for slow boys KEK
X god equals truth every inferential conclusion is false
yet uses same inferential conclusion to conclude it's God equals truth
AGAIN trancendental argument is for slowboys and low IQ subhumans KEK
The best thing about it is that it filters pseuds before you can even begin your pilpul.
The nazi memflag is killing you in this debate. You might want to take it a bit more seriously. The constants keks and cope as responses makes you look stupid.
Fun thread
God is the idea that there is a perfect truth and that morality is the very fabric of reality. I think it’s probably right and there is an overarching power, but it isn’t the God of the Bible necessarily. I also don’t believe in heaven or that Jesus was the literal son of god, but I do believe his teachings and that he died for my sins.
One thing atheists cannot deny is that they know everything. Discounting the existence of God is as arrogant as saying there absolutely is a god and he will only allow me into heaven.
does it make you mad, i clown your low IQ cope KEK
Discounting the existence of God is as arrogant as saying there absolutely is a god and he will only allow me into heaven.
I never discount its possibility, but I doubt its plausibility because it's redundant. If Christians or theists can claim that God is necessary, why can't these truths or axioms exist simply because they are necessary?
Claims with no evidence can be dismissed with no evidence. I don't need to entertain any imaginary things in your thoughts as real.
Otherwise you'd have to say that your agnostic to the magic unicorn who farted everything into existence. Which you're not actually going to entertain as a possibility.
he's showing my greatness
Thanks.
You made no statement indicating any understanding of what a transcendental argument is. Perhaps start properly by explaining Kant.
Kant’s transcendental argument is about how we need certain presuppositions in place in order for knowledge and experience to even make sense. It’s all about the conditions of possibility for experience, like the way we understand space, time, or causality. So, in his view, the very act of knowing something presupposes these fundamental structures
again, If Christians or theists can claim that God is necessary, why can't these truths or axioms exist simply because they are necessary?
I don't even like this life, why the FUCK would I want an eternal one.
Perhaps start properly by explaining Kant.
TAG comes from Van Til, and then popularized online by losers like Darth Dawkins(and his followers), Jay Dyer, and Andrew Wilson.
You don't need to touch Kant for TAG bullshit.
I don't even like this life, why the FUCK would I want an eternal one.
Their end goal is to be golems
OP is an obvious retard and likely a jewish shill
Watch it pretend an insult means it "won" an argument like a typical clueless teenager