Thursday, November 3, 2011
Within the Vein of the Surrealist
I'm not asking where reality comes into play, or fantasy does. Logic still applies, no matter the argument. This post does not contain words. But that is illogical, and false. I have never eaten anything- that could be logical, even if false. The truth of propositions is entirely seperate from their logic. A logical proposition is false, and the illogical one true. The better argument is the one that is true and logical, but there is nothing worse than the true and illogical. There is a God, but what greater injustice could I do Him than to argue for his existence? Twould be better to argue logically that He does not exist!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As we learned, it is no injustice to argue for God. As a responsible Chriustian philosopher, Plantinga suggests we shuld actively engage in:
ReplyDelete1) Apologetics -- both positive and negative
2) Philosophical theology
3) Cultural criticism
4) Positive Christian philosopy -- faith seeking understanding
But Plantinga also said that he has no more evidence for God than for other minds. We ought to work out from an initial premise of God. We show, as Christian Philosophers, how the Church should work. If we assume God, we can do much more than if we try to find a way to justify him.
ReplyDelete