Argument for the existence of God from Truth

24/7

25 Jun 10, 11:23

1. Truth Exists
2. Truth is immutable
3. Truth is eternal
4. Truth is mental
5. Truth is superior to the human mind
6. Truth is God

1. “Truth exists.” Clark establishes this point by reminding us of the self-defeating nature of any attempt to deny the existence of truth. Since skepticism is false, there must be knowledge; and if there is knowledge, there must exist the object of knowledge, namely truth.

2. “Truth is immutable.” It is impossible for truth to change. As Clark says, “Truth must be unchangeable. What is true today always has been and always will be true.” For Clark, all true propositions are eternal and immutable truths. He has no use for pragmatic views of truth that imply that what is true today may be false tomorrow. If truth changes, then pragmatism will be false tomorrow-if, indeed, it could ever be true. Truth itself is unaffected by the fact that sentences like “I am now typing” are sometimes true and usually false. Since I’ll present a rather long argument in defense of this claim later in this chapter, I’ll assume that this possible problem can be answered and move on to Clark’s next point.

3. “Truth is eternal.” It would be self-contradictory to deny the eternity of truth. If the world will never cease to exist, it is true that the world will never cease to exist. If the world will someday perish, then that is true. But truth itself will abide even though every created thing should perish. But suppose someone asks, “what if truth itself should perish?” Then it would still be true that truth had perished. Any denial of the eternity of truth turns out to be an affirmation of its eternity.

4. “Truth is Mental.” The existence of truth presupposes the existence of minds. “Without a mind, truth could not exist. The object of knowledge is a proposition, a meaning, a significance; it is a thought.” For Clark, the existence of truth is incompatible with any materialistic view of man. If the materialist admits the existence of consciousness at all, he regards it as an effect and not a cause. For a materialist, thoughts are always the result of bodily changes. This materialism implies that all thinking, including logical reasoning, is merely the result of mechanical necessity. But bodily changes can be neither true nor false. One set of physical motions cannot be truer than another. Therefore, if there is no mind, there can be no truth; and if there is no truth, materialism cannot be true. Likewise, if there is no mind, there can be no such thing as logical reasoning from which it follows that no materialist can possible provide a valid argument for his position. No reason can possible be given to justify an acceptance of materialism. Hence, for Clark, any denial of the mental nature of truth is self-stultifying. In Clarks words,

“If a truth, a proposition, or a thought were some physical motion in the brain, no two persons could have the same thought. A physical motion is a fleeting event numerically distinct from every other. Two persons cannot have the same motion, nor can one person have it twice. If this is what thought were, memory and communication would be impossible…It is a peculiarity of mind and not of body that the past can be made present. Accordingly, if one may thing the same thought twice, truth must be mental or spiritual. Not only does [truth] defy time; it defies space as well, for if communication is to be possible, the identical truth must be in two minds at once. If, in opposition, anyone wished to deny that an immaterial idea can exist in two minds at once, his denial must be conceived to exist in his own mind only; and since it has not registered in any other mind, it does not occur to us to refute it.”

To summarize Clark’s argument thus far, truth exists and is both eternal and immutable. Furthermore, truth can exist only in some mind.

5. “Truth is superior to the human mind.” By this, Clark means that by its very nature, truth cannot be subjective and individualistic. Humans know certain truths that are not only necessary but universal. While these truths are immutable, the human mind is changeable. Even though beliefs vary from one person to another, truth itself cannot change. Moreover, the human mind does not stand in judgment of truth: rather truth judges our reason. While we often judge other human minds (as when we say, for example, that someone’s mind is not a keen as it should be), we do not judge truth. If truth and the human mind were equal, truth could not be eternal and immutable since the human mind is finite, mutable, and subject to error. Therefore, truth must transcend human reason; truth must be superior to any individual human mind as well as to the sum total of human minds. From this it follows that there must be a mind higher than the human mind in which truth resides.

6. “Truth is God.” There must be an ontological ground for truth. But the ground of truth cannot be anything perishable or contingent. Since truth is eternal and immutable, it must exist in an eternal Mind. And since only God possesses these attributes, God must be truth.

“Is all this any more than the assertion that there is an eternal, immutable Mind, as Supreme Reason, a personal, living God? The truths or propositions that may be known are the thoughts of God, the eternal thoughts of God. And insofar as man knows anything he is in contact with God’s mind. Since further, God’s mind is God, we may… say, we have a vision of God.”

Therefore, When human beings know truth, we also know something of God’s nature. There is a sense in which all knowledge is a knowledge of God.

-Ronald Nash, Faith & Reason-

mh2

25 Jun 10, 11:40

i din read it sorry. so no comment. keke

Asromanista2001

25 Jun 10, 13:24

the whole story about an old man up in the sky created the world and then sending his son in HUMAN form to Earth..........

after so long, people are still so superstitious and naive enough to believe this story ???

this story is too HUMAN to be DIVINE !

and Christians condemn other people for their creation stories ???

at least the FLAT EARTH theory still sounds more reasonable !

24/7

25 Jun 10, 14:17

Originally posted by Asromanista2001:

the whole story about an old man up in the sky created the world and then sending his son in HUMAN form to Earth..........

after so long, people are still so superstitious and naive enough to believe this story ???

this story is too HUMAN to be DIVINE !

and Christians condemn other people for their creation stories ???

at least the FLAT EARTH theory still sounds more reasonable !

the whole story about an old man up in the sky created the world and then sending his son in HUMAN form to Earth..........

caricature.

after so long, people are still so superstitious and naive enough to believe this story ???

chronological snobbery.

this story is too HUMAN to be DIVINE !

from the above, non sequitur.

and Christians condemn other people for their creation stories ???

hasty generalization.

at least the FLAT EARTH theory still sounds more reasonable !

arguing from personal incredulity.

So much fallacious arguments, why should anyone, or even yourself, trust your own judgments? Are you proud to be an irrationalist?

-StarDust-

25 Jun 10, 14:23

Originally posted by Asromanista2001:

the whole story about an old man up in the sky created the world and then sending his son in HUMAN form to Earth..........

after so long, people are still so superstitious and naive enough to believe this story ???

this story is too HUMAN to be DIVINE !

and Christians condemn other people for their creation stories ???

at least the FLAT EARTH theory still sounds more reasonable !

Pls respect our religion.

Asromanista2001

25 Jun 10, 21:18

very sorry for showing no respect to a MAN-MADE religion.

TTFU

25 Jun 10, 22:33

Originally posted by Asromanista2001:

very sorry for showing no respect to a MAN-MADE religion.

I doubt you understand the opening post anyway

Rooney9

26 Jun 10, 01:27

Originally posted by 24/7:

So much fallacious arguments, why should anyone, or even yourself, trust your own judgments? Are you proud to be an irrationalist?

what!!!! an irrationalist accusing people of being irrational

dadeadman1337

26 Jun 10, 08:38

Originally posted by 24/7:

1. Truth Exists
2. Truth is immutable
3. Truth is eternal
4. Truth is mental
5. Truth is superior to the human mind
6. Truth is God

1. “Truth exists.” Clark establishes this point by reminding us of the self-defeating nature of any attempt to deny the existence of truth. Since skepticism is false, there must be knowledge; and if there is knowledge, there must exist the object of knowledge, namely truth.

2. “Truth is immutable.” It is impossible for truth to change. As Clark says, “Truth must be unchangeable. What is true today always has been and always will be true.” For Clark, all true propositions are eternal and immutable truths. He has no use for pragmatic views of truth that imply that what is true today may be false tomorrow. If truth changes, then pragmatism will be false tomorrow-if, indeed, it could ever be true. Truth itself is unaffected by the fact that sentences like “I am now typing” are sometimes true and usually false. Since I’ll present a rather long argument in defense of this claim later in this chapter, I’ll assume that this possible problem can be answered and move on to Clark’s next point.

3. “Truth is eternal.” It would be self-contradictory to deny the eternity of truth. If the world will never cease to exist, it is true that the world will never cease to exist. If the world will someday perish, then that is true. But truth itself will abide even though every created thing should perish. But suppose someone asks, “what if truth itself should perish?” Then it would still be true that truth had perished. Any denial of the eternity of truth turns out to be an affirmation of its eternity.

4. “Truth is Mental.” The existence of truth presupposes the existence of minds. “Without a mind, truth could not exist. The object of knowledge is a proposition, a meaning, a significance; it is a thought.” For Clark, the existence of truth is incompatible with any materialistic view of man. If the materialist admits the existence of consciousness at all, he regards it as an effect and not a cause. For a materialist, thoughts are always the result of bodily changes. This materialism implies that all thinking, including logical reasoning, is merely the result of mechanical necessity. But bodily changes can be neither true nor false. One set of physical motions cannot be truer than another. Therefore, if there is no mind, there can be no truth; and if there is no truth, materialism cannot be true. Likewise, if there is no mind, there can be no such thing as logical reasoning from which it follows that no materialist can possible provide a valid argument for his position. No reason can possible be given to justify an acceptance of materialism. Hence, for Clark, any denial of the mental nature of truth is self-stultifying. In Clarks words,

“If a truth, a proposition, or a thought were some physical motion in the brain, no two persons could have the same thought. A physical motion is a fleeting event numerically distinct from every other. Two persons cannot have the same motion, nor can one person have it twice. If this is what thought were, memory and communication would be impossible…It is a peculiarity of mind and not of body that the past can be made present. Accordingly, if one may thing the same thought twice, truth must be mental or spiritual. Not only does [truth] defy time; it defies space as well, for if communication is to be possible, the identical truth must be in two minds at once. If, in opposition, anyone wished to deny that an immaterial idea can exist in two minds at once, his denial must be conceived to exist in his own mind only; and since it has not registered in any other mind, it does not occur to us to refute it.”

To summarize Clark’s argument thus far, truth exists and is both eternal and immutable. Furthermore, truth can exist only in some mind.

5. “Truth is superior to the human mind.” By this, Clark means that by its very nature, truth cannot be subjective and individualistic. Humans know certain truths that are not only necessary but universal. While these truths are immutable, the human mind is changeable. Even though beliefs vary from one person to another, truth itself cannot change. Moreover, the human mind does not stand in judgment of truth: rather truth judges our reason. While we often judge other human minds (as when we say, for example, that someone’s mind is not a keen as it should be), we do not judge truth. If truth and the human mind were equal, truth could not be eternal and immutable since the human mind is finite, mutable, and subject to error. Therefore, truth must transcend human reason; truth must be superior to any individual human mind as well as to the sum total of human minds. From this it follows that there must be a mind higher than the human mind in which truth resides.

6. “Truth is God.” There must be an ontological ground for truth. But the ground of truth cannot be anything perishable or contingent. Since truth is eternal and immutable, it must exist in an eternal Mind. And since only God possesses these attributes, God must be truth.

“Is all this any more than the assertion that there is an eternal, immutable Mind, as Supreme Reason, a personal, living God? The truths or propositions that may be known are the thoughts of God, the eternal thoughts of God. And insofar as man knows anything he is in contact with God’s mind. Since further, God’s mind is God, we may… say, we have a vision of God.”

Therefore, When human beings know truth, we also know something of God’s nature. There is a sense in which all knowledge is a knowledge of God.

-Ronald Nash, Faith & Reason-

This entire argument just needs to be referred to at its final point. "Since truth is eternal and immutable, it must exist in an eternal Mind. And since only God possesses these attributes, God must be truth." It uses the petitio principii fallacy, with its reasoning that God is true because we know truth is eternal, yet it says that "only God possesses these attributes" - which already falsely assumes that the subject of the argument is true, hence this entire argument is flawed

SomebodyInSG

28 Jun 10, 18:27

Belief in a religion is one thing, respect for it is another thing.

It is totally possible to respect the beliefs of another without having to have the same beliefs.

To further point out, this is applicable whethere you are a Christian or a non-Christian, whether you are a believer or any religion or believer or none at all.

24/7

30 Jun 10, 11:18

Originally posted by dadeadman1337:

 

This entire argument just needs to be referred to at its final point. "Since truth is eternal and immutable, it must exist in an eternal Mind. And since only God possesses these attributes, God must be truth." It uses the petitio principii fallacy, with its reasoning that God is true because we know truth is eternal, yet it says that "only God possesses these attributes" - which already falsely assumes that the subject of the argument is true, hence this entire argument is flawed

not true. at best, it takes the form of a compressed syllogism, so if an entity with this set of characteristics exist, then entity X, previously asserted to have this same set of characteristics, exists too. This argument was taken out from a book, hence there is a broader context behind it.

Asromanista2001

30 Jun 10, 12:06

aiyoah, why all the deep deep words to talk about something that don't exist ah ?

Jensysmithsg

8 Jul 10, 04:48

There is always something beyond Science.... The world has so many mysteries that even scientists could never tell reasons.... They can never find the reasons for many chemical or biological events... Who is the authority or take control of those activities?..... Did u ever try to think beyond...There is always God... He created the whole Universe....

He sent his only son as a Sacrifice to cleanse your dirty sins... You may have neither identified nor repent.... It is obvious the world has to face persons like you in these last days..

You might have not recognised the strength of God.... But people like me are the witnesses of God...Even I have done so many dreadful sins but the Word of God helped me to get back to the truth and it retrieved my life from death of sin....

If you didnt feel it, you cannot comment on the existence...

The time is near...Repent your sins.. Or else the hell flames are waiting for you...

Fairyfairy86

8 Jul 10, 08:14

Originally posted by Jensysmithsg:

There is always something beyond Science.... The world has so many mysteries that even scientists could never tell reasons.... They can never find the reasons for many chemical or biological events... Who is the authority or take control of those activities?..... Did u ever try to think beyond...There is always God... He created the whole Universe....

He sent his only son as a Sacrifice to cleanse your dirty sins... You may have neither identified nor repent.... It is obvious the world has to face persons like you in these last days..

You might have not recognised the strength of God.... But people like me are the witnesses of God...Even I have done so many dreadful sins but the Word of God helped me to get back to the truth and it retrieved my life from death of sin....

If you didnt feel it, you cannot comment on the existence...

The time is near...Repent your sins.. Or else the hell flames are waiting for you...

if this world is perfect, i will admit that god is powerful and god is controlling it. look at this world, it is getting out of god's hand. tell me, who is controlling it ? there was a christian who asked me to repent now or it will be too late. i asked him what sin ? he told me the original sin. i told him what adam's and eve's sin got to do with me ?

we humans know that if you do not want to let your kids eat the sweets, you have to hide somewhere and beyond the reach of your kids. i wonder how come god did not hide the forbidden apple from adam and eve, or this world will not end up like today ? isn't god is smarter than human ?

Happyinfo2

8 Jul 10, 12:24

Originally posted by Fairyfairy86:

if this world is perfect, i will admit that god is powerful and god is controlling it. look at this world, it is getting out of god's hand. tell me, who is controlling it ? there was a christian who asked me to repent now or it will be too late. i asked him what sin ? he told me the original sin. i told him what adam's and eve's sin got to do with me ?

we humans know that if you do not want to let your kids eat the sweets, you have to hide somewhere and beyond the reach of your kids. i wonder how come god did not hide the forbidden apple from adam and eve, or this world will not end up like today ? isn't god is smarter than human ?

God never promised that the world will be perfect...did He?

and even if there is such thing as a perfect world, then there will still be people who will not believe in God.... why? there are no such thing as God and we do not need Him since everything is perfect already right?

and what is really a perfect world? what is perfect to one may still be lacking to another...

there are evil and there always will be...temptations are everywhere....God teaches us to avoid them....we just don't listen.

you can hide the sweets from the kids but they still have ways to get them...and didn't people says we should not be "too protective" of our kids?

if everyone on this earth can truely loves one another...then, perhaps we are closer to a "perfect world"......but can we?

despondent

9 Jul 10, 00:14

the classic qn: wad is perfection? can all of us even come to a universal agreement for this? i seriously doubt it...

Fairyfairy86

9 Jul 10, 08:37

Originally posted by despondent:

the classic qn: wad is perfection? can all of us even come to a universal agreement for this? i seriously doubt it...

meaning no misfortune. no natural disasters, no body dying from sickness and accidents, no more pain, nobody dying from hunger etc.

Fairyfairy86

9 Jul 10, 08:38

i believe everybody can agree on the above.

Happyinfo2

9 Jul 10, 09:06

Originally posted by Fairyfairy86:

meaning no misfortune. no natural disasters, no body dying from sickness and accidents, no more pain, nobody dying from hunger etc.

does that means that everyone will be happy then?

what causes natural disaters?

how about nobody dying at all?

Happyinfo2

9 Jul 10, 09:07

Originally posted by Fairyfairy86:

i believe everybody can agree on the above.

don't think so.....

despondent

9 Jul 10, 11:08

christianity wun agree cos to christianity, juz merely no suffering is not perfection...there are 3 levels, suffering, no suffering and blessings...so sorry, christianity wun agree wif ur definition of perfection...how abt being all-knowing?

iceFatboy

9 Jul 10, 11:22

o offense to any.

The same people are here saying the same thing in all the topics. To me, it is one big vicious cycle. The same people will debate about God's non existence, blah blah blah, and on the other way, the people will contest that, blah blah, blah.

Bottomline, for those who denies Christian's God's existence and everything, I mean if ur agurements are all solid, please, submit it to the necessary authorities, be it local or global, get Christianity wiped off the charts.

End of day, live and let live. Cheers..

Jensysmithsg

10 Jul 10, 01:31

Originally posted by Happyinfo2:

God never promised that the world will be perfect...did He?

and even if there is such thing as a perfect world, then there will still be people who will not believe in God.... why? there are no such thing as God and we do not need Him since everything is perfect already right?

and what is really a perfect world? what is perfect to one may still be lacking to another...

there are evil and there always will be...temptations are everywhere....God teaches us to avoid them....we just don't listen.

you can hide the sweets from the kids but they still have ways to get them...and didn't people says we should not be "too protective" of our kids?

if everyone on this earth can truely loves one another...then, perhaps we are closer to a "perfect world"......but can we?

I totally Agree with you... There is nothing to argue here. Let us pray for these people... Thats all we can do...God has to change their mind as he is the real creator. He will make them to identify their sins and repent....Lets pray for a revival....

Jensysmithsg

10 Jul 10, 01:34

Originally posted by Happyinfo2:

God never promised that the world will be perfect...did He?

and even if there is such thing as a perfect world, then there will still be people who will not believe in God.... why? there are no such thing as God and we do not need Him since everything is perfect already right?

and what is really a perfect world? what is perfect to one may still be lacking to another...

there are evil and there always will be...temptations are everywhere....God teaches us to avoid them....we just don't listen.

you can hide the sweets from the kids but they still have ways to get them...and didn't people says we should not be "too protective" of our kids?

if everyone on this earth can truely loves one another...then, perhaps we are closer to a "perfect world"......but can we?

I totally Agree with you... There is nothing to argue here. Let us pray for these people... Thats all we can do...God has to change their mind as he is the real creator. He will make them to identify their sins and repent....Lets pray for a revival....

Fairyfairy86

10 Jul 10, 08:24

Originally posted by Jensysmithsg:

I totally Agree with you... There is nothing to argue here. Let us pray for these people... Thats all we can do...God has to change their mind as he is the real creator. He will make them to identify their sins and repent....Lets pray for a revival....

if god has the ability to change our mind, he would have done so long ago. after more than 2000 years, he still could not change our mind ,so no point praying.