Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bosse  Hello VanVos,
If the basis for the apologist's argument is that no other worldviews work, then hypothetical worldviews are valid. At the very least, if they claim to have an objectively certain proof for God's existence, then they are claiming to have a strong modal TAG. What Van Til and Banhsen taught was the strong modal version. The phrase "impossibility of the contrary" says it all.
But this fails to satisfy the "impossibility of the contrary" claim.
The conceptual scheme and the concept of the God of Christianity are both derived from *scripture*. So, in the end TAG is positing "just some conceptual scheme." It is a conceptual scheme where the ground for all being is found in the ontological reality of the triune God.
Brian |
Not sure I follow. A conceptual scheme is a paradigm, a pattern of thought on how to know. A conceptual scheme is deaf and mute, where as the christian worldview is based upon divine revelation. The scriptures are authorative and gives us a concrete unified worldview. Does this not set it apart from just being a conceptual scheme?
VanVos