The transcendental argument for the existence of God is an argument that attempts to prove God’s existence by arguing that logic, reason, morality, and other fundamental aspects of human reasoning would be impossible without the existence of God. The argument contends that all rational thought presupposes the existence of God because without God, there would be no universal, abstract laws of logic and morality that humans could discover and apply. The argument claims that the atheist worldview cannot account for the preconditions of intelligible human experience and reasoning.
The transcendental argument was developed by the Christian philosopher Cornelius Van Til. It is a type of presuppositional apologetic that argues there are certain necessary preconditions for the intelligibility of human experience, and that the only worldview that can account for these necessary preconditions is Christian theism centered around the absolute and universal God revealed in the Bible.
Here is a basic outline of the transcendental argument for God’s existence:
- Logical thought, rationality, and knowledge presuppose certain universal and abstract laws of logic, mathematics, morality, etc. These laws constitute the necessary preconditions to making sense of human experience and reasoning.
- People’s attempts to reason and gain knowledge of the world around them would be impossible if these abstract laws did not hold everywhere and at all times.
- These laws are transcendent (they exist beyond space and time as absolute universals). Laws of logic, reason, morality, etc. have a transcendent character.
- These transcendent, absolute laws require some transcendent, absolute mind (God) to account for them. They cannot arise from random material processes.
- Therefore, the existence of God as a transcendent absolute mind is the necessary precondition for the intelligible human experience that we have. The atheistic worldview cannot account for rational thought and human knowledge.
In essence, the argument claims that all human reasoning requires God because these immaterial, universal laws could never arise from a mindless, material universe. They require a transcendent source in a universal, absolute Mind (God) who establishes the rational order of the universe. Without God as the source of knowledge and rationality, we could not reason, think logically, or trust our senses. Thus presupposing God is necessary to make sense of human reasoning and experience.
Defenders of the argument claim that atheists cannot account for immaterial laws within their worldview, since atheism asserts that only mindless matter exists. Therefore, the preconditions of intelligible experience require the existence of God. The transcendental argument attempts to show that God is the necessary starting point for all rational discussion and human knowledge, not an uncertain conclusion drawn from evidence within an already intelligible universe.
Key Points of the Transcendental Argument
Here are some key claims and logical steps within the transcendental argument for God’s existence:
- Laws of logic/morality/reason exist – The argument asserts that there are real universal laws that govern human thought and morality. Examples include the law of non-contradiction (A cannot be both A and non-A at the same time) and moral laws against things like murder.
- These laws are immaterial – The laws of logic, reason, and morality have a universal, absolute, immaterial nature to them. They transcend physical locations and people’s subjective preferences.
- People use these immaterial laws to reason – Humans depend on these universal laws to think rationally, conduct science, make moral judgments, etc. They are indispensable to human knowledge and experience.
- Therefore, an immaterial mind established these laws – If these laws are real yet immaterial, they require some immaterial, universal Mind as their source. They cannot come from material processes alone.
- That Mind is God – The absolute, universal, transcendent Mind which upholds the rational order of the universe is what the Bible calls God. God establishes the objective standards that make knowledge possible.
In summary, the transcendental argument claims that the preconditions of human intelligence require the existence of a supreme Intelligence as their source. This line of reasoning then concludes that the biblical God is the only being that can fit this role.
Examples and Variations
Here are some examples and variations on how the transcendental argument is formulated:
Laws of Logic
1) Logical thought presupposes certain transcendent laws of logic like the law of non-contradiction.
2) These laws of logic cannot arise from random material processes, since thoughts are immaterial.
3) Therefore, the existence of the immaterial laws of logic requires an absolute, universal, immaterial source: God.
Morality
1) Moral judgments require real objective moral standards that transcend personal or cultural preferences.
2) An atheistic view of the world has no ground for binding moral obligations or objective moral duties.
3) Therefore, a moral universe requires the existence of a supreme moral lawgiver: God.
Reliability of Reason
1) Human reasoning requires that our sensations and cognitive faculties are generally reliable.
2) The assumption that our minds can correspond to objective truth cannot be guaranteed in an atheistic universe of particles and chance events.
3) Therefore, the existence of a rational universe sustained by a supreme rational Mind (God) best accounts for the reliability of human reason.
There are many other lines of argument stemming from these basic ideas about logic, morality, truth, etc. But they all contend that universal immaterial laws require immaterial explanations, and God is the best explanation.
Key Defenders and Proponents
While there may have been precursors to the argument in earlier Christian thought, the transcendental argument for God’s existence was most substantially developed and popularized by these modern Christian philosophers and theologians:
- Cornelius Van Til – The forefather of modern presuppositional apologetics. Developed and formalized the transcendental argument.
- Gordon Clark – Philosopher who used the argument extensively, emphasizing its relationship to the laws of logic.
- Greg Bahnsen – Student of Van Til who was a prominent presuppositionalist apologist and debater, utilizing the transcendental approach.
- John Frame – Philosopher and theologian who succeeded Van Til at Westminster Seminary and continued developing presuppositionalism and the transcendental method.
- Francis Schaeffer – Christian thinker who brought presuppositionalism and the transcendental approach into the evangelical mainstream.
While not the only argument used in presuppositional apologetics, the transcendental argument has been a prominent tool for contending that the Christian worldview alone can account for the necessary preconditions of human knowledge and rationality.
Key Biblical Basis
The transcendental argument is primarily based on philosophical reasoning about epistemological foundations. However, defenders of the argument root it in these sorts of biblical ideas:
- God is truth and the source of all knowledge (John 14:6, Col. 2:3, Prov. 1:7)
- God upholds creation through His mind and reason (Col. 1:17, Heb. 1:3)
- Unbelievers suppress God’s truth through unrighteous thinking (Rom. 1:18-21)
- God has written His law on people’s hearts (Rom. 2:14-15)
- Faith precedes understanding and knowledge (Prov. 1:7, Heb. 11:3)
In essence, the transcendental argument starts from the biblical view that God’s mind establishes the order of the universe and makes knowledge possible. The argument contends that without this fundamental starting point, knowledge is impossible.
Objections and Responses
Here are some common objections against the transcendental argument for God’s existence:
Objection 1: The argument commits the false cause fallacy.
It hastily assumes God is the cause of logic and reason without considering other possible causes.
Response: Defenders claim it concludes God’s existence based on the nature of the effect (immaterial laws), not mere order of occurrence. They argue it is valid to infer an immaterial cause from an immaterial effect.
Objection 2: Positing God is an unnecessary assumption.
Laws of nature, logic, etc. exist as brute facts without requiring a god to ground them.
Response: The argument claims God is the only being whose existence could account for all the necessary preconditions in a single ontological foundation. Immediate brute facts still require explanatory causes.
Objection 3: Laws of logic are conventions.
Logical absolutes like non-contradiction arise from how we define terms and concepts, not from any transcendent reality.
Response: Defenders argue that language and concepts themselves require an objective rational structure, which requires God’s existence. Conventions still require a foundation.
Objection 4: Non-theistic worldviews can justify transcendentals.
Worldviews like Platonism or Aristotelianism can allow for abstract objects like logical universals without a personal God.
Response: Advocates argue that principles in a God-based worldview are more appropriately unified, absolute, and fundamental to human reasoning than in other non-theistic systems.
In summary, critics claim the argument overstates the necessity of positing God as a cause of transcendent universals, when they can exist as brute facts or conventions. Defenders argue that God provides the only truly absolute and fundamental grounding for the preconditions of knowledge, logic, morality, etc.
Significance and Application
Some significant aspects of how the transcendental argument is applied include:
- Attempting to show God’s existence is the necessary starting point for knowledge.
- Seeking to undermine non-theistic worldviews as unable to account for preconditions of intelligibility.
- Trying to show flaws in atheistic moral reasoning by arguing moral absolutes require God’s existence.
- Using logic and rationality to demonstrate the validity of a Christian presuppositional stance.
- Seeking to put unbelievers in a position where they must assume God’s existence to argue against it.
The transcendental approach has been influential in presuppositional apologetics. It aims to put Christian theism in the driver’s seat as the necessary precondition for human knowledge. Critics contend that it does not succeed in proving God’s existence but relies on shaky philosophical assumptions. Nevertheless, the argument provides a rational defense for belief in God as the foundation of knowledge and morality.