Quote:
Originally Posted by neeeel
You realise if we go down that route, you dont get to claim god as the ultimate authority? You would have to show that god exists, and is the ultimate authority.
So, if you really want, we can go that way, but instead, why not just justify your claim that the (trinitarian) christian god is the only way that logic can exist.
Also, why would/should I care what your late Christian friend, Gary H. said?
I only mentioned Gary to provide proper attribution to the quote.
Any ULTIMATE authority has to be self-attesting or self-authenticating. If God is the ultimate authority, then any "proof" of God would already include God's existence.
For example, suppose someone asked you, "Prove to me that the laws of logic are valid." Any argument that you would give necessarily ASSUME that the laws of logic are already valid.
In short, the PROOF that the laws of logic are valid, is that an argument AGAINST the laws of logic being valid would have to utilize those laws of logic.
In a similar manner, T.A.C.T. is in essence the idea that to rationally DENY God's existence would REQUIRE God to exist in order to DENY Him.
[More to come....]