Did Lewis argue that you have to acknowledge God's existence to deny it? Is that true?

Question

Is that good logic?

Answer 1

It depends. If you are denying the existance of God, then no that wouldn't make sense.
But if you are just denying God. I.e, you think he exists but you don't like what he says, or you prefer to just do your own thing, then yeh it does make sense.

Not sure if it's good logic though...

Answer 2

Yes. It is good logic because how can you deny something if you do not know that it exists? There has to be put forth a case for denial, a logical case, and evidence must be provided to support a logical case. If there is no explanation for the source of all matter in the material since, then we must conclude that matter was created ex nilo, or in other words, matter was created from thought----God's thought. Therefore, to accept the existence of matter is to accept the existence of God. To deny God yet accept the existence of matter is upside down thinking, which is why the Big Bang theorist must keep coming up with more extravagant models of their theory, such as the current one that claims that their were multiple bangs.

Answer 3

Atheists believe there exists false religion. Without true religion, there would be no conception of religion at all, just as there would be no counterfeit money without the real thing.

Atheists see "counterfeit, counterfeit, counterfeit," and think there is none real. But would there be counterfeit money if the real thing did not exist?

By this kind of logic (which must seem very flawed to an atheist), false religions stand as evidence of the existence of God.

That's not necessarily the way Lewis saw it. He might have thought that "atheist" has "theist" in it. Without God, an atheist would simply be an "a."

Answer 4

Technically speaking one must be open to the possibility of the existence of God in order to try and dis-prove Him. Whether or not C.S. Lewis argued that point I'm not sure but It makes sense because one must look from a perspective of there Being a God before they can refute it.

Answer 5

No, that's absurd. By that logic before you could deny that men are women, you would first have to believe that men ARE women. Since the differences are obvious, any attempt to dispute it must be fallacious. Lewis was a using a common rhetorical trick, he claimed that since a proposition can't be disproved it must be considered proved. That allows him to claim his beliefs are facts, without the tedious business of actually having to support them with evidence. In point of fact, since the existence or non-existence of Deity(s) can be neither proved nor disproved, the question of one of faith, which requires no proof, it is simple acceptance.

Answer 6

He did, but aside from its "poetic" value, it is the lamest of logic. If you accepted the parameters of it, there is nothing you can conceive that doesn't "exist" - and that covers everything from the unicorn and Santa, to God. All strictly "logical" proofs of God are actually a bit insulting to many theologists - if for no other reason than that if God were just a "logical" conclusion, then faith would be superfluous. To paraphrase my friend the rev, "He don't come that cheap."

Answer 7

You need to acknowledge pixies before you can argue that Unicorns are hollow.

Answer 8

Not sure if he did, that sounds familiar from "Mere Christianity" though. It was so ridiculous I had to stop reading it. So no, it's false logic.

Let's try the same with a flying purple people eater!!!

Answer 9

What existed always has and that which does not never has. Anything can exist if only in the mind. . .

Answer 10

It works for Yahoo.

If you do a web search for "Atheist" - the official definition says "denies the existance of god." http://education.yahoo.com/reference/encyclopedia/entry/atheism

That had me spouting mad for about an hour.