The Deductive Truth Argument (D.T.A.) For God's Existence The Deductive Truth Argument (Modus Ponens Form):
Support For Premise 1: In order to answer the question, "What is true?" human beings inherently employ various forms of logical reasoning. While other forms of reasoning - such as abductive and inductive reasoning - lead to conclusions that are not necessarily true, valid deductive reasoning leads to conclusions that are necessarily true provided they're based (premised) on known truths. What we see from this is that truth cannot be deduced from the unknown; only truth begets truth. We can further illustrate the point with the following argument... 1. If life on mars exists, then we're not alone. (?) 2. Life on mars exists. (?) 3. Therefore, we're not alone. (?) ...Even though the form of this argument is valid, its conclusion does not follow from the premises because the premises are not currently known to be true. What this demonstrates is that it is logically impossible to apprehend truth from a lack thereof. Again, only truth begets truth. An atheistic existence begins with no truth or knowledge: at some point in an atheistic history, truth and knowledge would not exist (one could even trace things back to a supposed quantum vacuum or similar). Thus, all would-be truth in an atheistic existence is ultimately premised not on truth, but on a total lack thereof. Therefore, truth cannot be deduced or known in an atheistic existence. 'God or not God' is a true dichotomy. If deductive truth cannot be accounted for in an atheistic existence, then it follows logically that it can only be accounted for via God. Per above, we have demonstrated that it is logically impossible to derive deductive truth via an atheistic existence. Per the Biblical worldview, God is an eternal being with eternal knowledge. God made mankind in his image and revealed certain truths to humanity. Thus, we begin with truth and knowledge and can thereby ascertain and deduce novel truths. Support For Premise 2: To deny that deductive truths are known is ultimately to deny all knowledge, and is therefore self defeating (deductive reasoning is the atheist's only 'hope' for true knowledge, and it fails). Nevertheless, several examples of known deductive truths are as follows: - If I have $10 and I give you $5, I'll have $5 left. I gave you $5. Therefore, I have $5 left. - All bachelors are single. John claims to be a bachelor. Therefore, John claims to be single. - If A = B and B = C, then A = C. What About Self Evident Truth? Self evident truths such as the laws of logic are readily accounted for in the Biblical worldview, but cannot be accounted for in an atheistic existence for precisely the same reasons that deductive truth cannot be accounted for. In this argument, we have appealed to deductive reasoning for the greater purpose of showing that truth as a whole (including the laws of logic) cannot be known if not based on pre-existing knowledge of that which is true. If one (still) argues that truth does not have to be based on other known truths, we can apply the same argument 'deductively' to demonstrate its absurdity... 1. If all apples are red, then pigs can fly. (false premise) 2. All apples are red. (false premise) 3. Therefore, pigs can fly. (?) ...In other words, we can proceed to make any truth claim that we want, totally unsupported. If this is allowable, then it is allowable to state that God exists with that being the end of all discussion. Laws of logic that do not derive from truth (i.e., the mind of God) would be just as unknowable as the conclusion above. We'd have no means by which to apprehend their truth value to any degree whatsoever. ...Only truth begets truth. Jesus answered, "I am the way, the truth, and the life." - John 14:6 In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. - John 1:1 The atheist is welcome to claim knowledge of truth, but must violate his own worldview in order to do it, and must borrow from the Biblical worldview in order to account for it. Click here for more. |