The Transcendental Argument

God can be proven to exist because of the impossibility of the contrary. That is what Christian apologist Greg Bahnsen said to atheist Gordon Stein in a formal debate back in the 1980's. Bahnsen was a defender of an argument for God's existence called the transcendental argument. This argument, as we discussed in Life U, attempts to show that God's existence is certainly true and that atheism is not just improbable, but is a worldview that cannot be true. This idea reflects the statement that Paul makes in Romans 1, where he explains that all men can understand the existence and divinity of God in nature, yet suppress these truths. Bahnsen used this argument and was critical of other arguments that attempted to show that it was more probable that God existed. While I do not agree with some of his criticisms of other arguments for God's existence, I do agree that the transcendental argument is by far the most fascinating, and if it is valid, it certainly shows that God's existence is not just a probable proposition, but a certain one. Here I will give a short overview of the argument:

The arguments starts by showing how each individual has a worldview. A worldview can be defined as what someone believes about all of reality. For instance, the Christian worldview sees reality as follows:

1. God is the creator of the whole universe. (Space, Time, Matter and Energy.)

2. God is an eternal being who is a Trinity of Persons sharing one Nature.

3. God is all powerful, all knowing and completely good.

4. God is spirit and transcends matter, space and time.

5. God made man his image and gave man a body, a mind and a soul.

6. All truth comes from God and is revealed in both the natural world and supernatural revelation (The Bible)

7. The fullness of God's revelation was revealed through the person of Jesus of Nazareth, who is God the Son from all eternity with both a full divine nature and a full human nature.

8. Jesus was put to death on the cross, was buried, but rose again from the dead. Because of this man, who is in a state of sin and separation from God, can now be justified and enjoy friendship and communion with God.

9. God is the foundation of all morality.

This is just a summary of the Christian worldview, for much more could be said.

The transcendental argument attempts to show that no other worldview makes sense except the Christian worldview. The most fundamental aspect of a worldview is whether or not that worldview includes God's existence or not. There are many worldviews that include God's existence or non-existence, but fundamentally one can break down each worldview as theistic (God exists) or atheistic (God does not exist). And each atheistic worldview has one common factor that is fundamental: all that exists is nature (space, time and matter). To deny this would be to deny atheism.

Therefore, given the fact that there are fundamentally two types of world views, we can judge which worldview is correct by seeing which one is consistent on its own terms, as well as our own rational experience. The atheistic worldview can be shown to be inconsistent because it assumes, or presupposes transcendental realities, while denying them at the same time. The most obvious way to prove this is by showing the transcendental nature of the laws of logic and how it is impossible that the laws of logic are a part of nature.

The laws of logic are what we use everyday, even if we are not aware of it, to make decisions and understand the world around us. One of the laws of logic is the the law of identity, meaning that a thing or idea is what it is. For example, A = A, or a phone is a phone. Another law of logic is the law of non-contradiction. This law states that a thing is not its opposite. For example, A does not equal non-A, or a phone is not a phone and a non-phone. Everyday a person assumes and uses this type of thinking to carry out their normal daily routines. I get up and brush my teeth and assume that my toothpaste is not toothpaste and a brick at the same time. The laws of logic exist, and we can know this, for even if we doubted that there were laws of logic, we would have to use those laws in order to try and disprove them. For instance, if I tried to say that A does not equal A, I would still be using the law of identity to define what equal means as well as what a proposition is, and finally even to define what A and non-A is. These laws exist because of the impossibility of the contrary.

Now that we have established that these laws exist, we need to ask whether they are laws found in nature, made up in man's mind, or transcend man and nature. They cannot be from nature, for where do we find the laws of logic in space, time or matter? In fact, it would be impossible to discover these laws in nature, for we would already have to know them in order to try to find them. Secondly, they are not man-made laws. For instance, if they were man-made, it could be possible for another culture to make laws of logic that stated that a cat was a cat and a non-cat at the same time. But this would still be assuming correct laws of logic in order to be irrational. Also, these laws are held universally by all cultures. In fact, we know that the laws are not man-made because when we argue and debate, we do not appeal to our own opinions but we appeal to objective truth. Imagine a debate where a person believes the earth is flat and another person believes the earth is round. If the laws of logic were man-made, both would be right because both could make up their own laws to determine what is truth. Obviously, this is nonsense and contrary to experience and reason. So this leaves us with just one option-the laws of logic are transcendental.

Since everyone has a worldview, and since every worldview is fundamentally atheistic or theistic, which worldview displays the fact that the laws of logic are transcendent? Obviously, the theistic worldview, because its worldview includes non-material/transcendental realities, whereas the atheistic worldview does not. The atheist has to borrow concepts that do not make sense in their worldview to try and justify their worldview. Therefore, atheism is false because of the impossibility of the contrary.

This is a short summary and we will continue to explore this argument in Life U. I welcome thoughts, objections, corrections and any questions.

Jason Anderson