The Powerful Transcendental Argument For The Existence Of God
Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI
Biblical Authority Ministries, August 14, 2025 (Donate)
In today's church, the most common methods people try to use to argue for the existence of some deity are the Classical and Evidential approaches. Both are identical in the methodology but have different focuses. It is the foundational intricacies of the Classical and Evidential arguments that are the biggest problem. For instance, they use human logic as the ultimate starting point to derive probabilistic philosophical arguments for God (Classical) or science or historical evidences (evidential) to conclude that some sort of deity might exist.
Sadly, these methods fall tragically short due
to the same root problem. They are predicated on autonomous human logic
(e.g., the "Greek method") as the “supreme” authority above God. Consequently, these arguments miserably and vaguely
point to some generic deity or “a god” with a blind leap of faith to the God/"god" of one's own choosing (e.g., Muslim, Deistic, Mormon, Biblical, etc.). Even so, the Classical/Evidential method does not point to the God of the Bible
but instead as a “sloppy designer” at best.
The Classical and Evidential arguments do not treat God and
His Word as the authority that He is and deserves (remember, man's logic is seen as supreme instead). These problems have been
recognized for years, but many Christians who use these types of arguments are
satisfied with thinking it is good enough to start by arguing for a generic
deity and to then make the blind leap of faith to the God of the Bible.
Image by Bodie Hodge
As a point of note, I used to be in this Classical/Evidential camp rather heavily for about 10 years. So my criticism here is not to those who are in it, but an encouragement for them to understand how to use God’s Word as the starting point and the evidence and philosophy as a confirmation.
But again, here’s the core issue: the Classical and Evidential methods continually suggest that the mind of the unbeliever is somehow capable of judging evidence and arguments correctly, given his/her own autonomous reasoning. But is the blinded, veiled, impure, hostile, carnal, darkened, and debased mind of an unbeliever really in a position to reason with correct godly thinking? Not at all—in fact, it’s a completely unbiblical position for a Christian to stand on (e.g., Romans 1:28[1]; 2 Corinthians 3:14 and Thessalonians 2:11;[2]; 2 Ephesians 4:18[3]; Colossians 1:21[4]; 1 Timothy 6:5[5]).
And every other apologetic method (like fideism, Reformed Epistemology,
and so on) fall short of an absolute standard as well.
Transcendental Methodology
So now we have arrived at heart of the issue of the
existence of God—formally known as the Transcendental
Argument for the Existence of God (or abbreviated as TAG). So how is the Transcendental method (also called Presuppositional method) different?
The Transcendental method is fundamentally different from
all these other methods that must appeal to human logic as “supreme”. Rather,
this fully biblical apologetic method starts and ends with ONLY the God
of the Bible as the absolute/supreme authority—in all matters—and
His revealed Word to man comes with the authority of God Himself.
In doing so, one doesn’t start with fallible, autonomous
human reason (i.e., man’s errant logic) as supreme—but instead starts with God.
Furthermore, this method keeps with God as the standard throughout the entire
argument (i.e., no need for a blind leap of faith to the God of the Bible). And
thus, the apologist who uses this method truly honors God (who is perfect and
the standard for right thinking) not by relying on his own way of thinking but
by mimicking God’s way of thinking in all matters. This biblical method works
by humbly tossing our own thoughts aside and faithfully letting God be God when
it comes to thinking about any matter—including apologetics and His existence.
Instead of starting with our own errant autonomous reason to try to argue for some sort of imperfect god, we start with the perfect God of the Bible. And so, the goal of the Christian apologist is to imitate God’s way of reasoning to look at all matters—including His existence and the supremacy of His Word—by simply standing on the truthfulness of His Word as the starting point and foundational cornerstone throughout the whole argument.
In other words, per the Transcendental method, there’s a never
a time in the argument where the apologist must “step off” standing on God’s
Word as the ultimate standard.
The Matter of Authority
The godly New Testament authors constantly quoted and treated
the Old Testament (the first 39 books of the Bible) as the absolute
authority—this should have been a clue that they didn’t hold to the Greek
(pagan) method of autonomous human logic. Instead, the New Testament
authors repeatedly treated God and His Word as the only absolute authority
that it is.
Most notably, the first line of the Old Testament (and of
the entire Bible) treats God as the ultimate and final authority.
In
the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. (Genesis 1:1, NKJV)
God revealed Himself by final authority as He is the final authority on all matters.
When He states His existence in the first line of the Bible—He
could only do it by final authority. Why?
Because there is no authority greater than or supreme to God. By way of
revelation to man, the absolutely true God revealed His existence.
God also made His existence known in the heart of all by
their conscience (e.g., Romans 1:18-32, 2:14-16[6]).
And unbelievers don’t just know some general deity in their “heart-of-hearts”—rather
they know the true God of the Bible—but suppress this knowledge by their
unrighteousness. Those who suppress the knowledge of God and His existence are
given over to a debased mind (per Romans 1) and taken captive by Satan (2
Timothy 2:25-26[7]).
Which means those who object to God’s absolute authority are
clearly not in their right mind! By what authority can someone object to God’s
absolute authority? The audacity of such a person shows the lack of basic logic
and reason. This is a faulty appeal to authority fallacy. This is not to say
unbelievers are unintelligent—many are quite brilliant in many respects, but
that they fail next to God who is the basis for all reason, logic, knowledge,
wisdom, intelligence, and truth.
The issue of authority is ever-present in the Transcendental
Argument for the Existence of God (TAG). Again, it is not like the Classical or Evidential arguments—not at all. In fact, the TAG method is not really a
method—like the Classical arguments, for instance—but rather it is the basis
for what makes argumentation even possible in the first place! (i.e.,
without God, you couldn’t argue at all!)
Some Christians mistakenly believe all the different arguments
for God’s existence (grand design, first cause, etc.) are like different tools
in your apologetic “toolbox” to be used for different situations, and that you
can simply throw in TAG as just another tool in your toolbox, which you can use
if the occasion calls for it. However, it is not at all like that! If someone believes
this, it shows they don’t understand the basic premise of the Transcendental
argument.
The Transcendental argument is that without the God of the
Bible, there is no basis to make an argument at all! Recall that only
the biblical worldview as revealed in Scripture provides a rational
basis for the preconditions of intelligibility. Thus, all other man-made
worldviews that do not start with God and His Word as supreme are errant
right from the start. The TAG is intricately connected to authority of the God
of the Bible alone. If you can wrap your mind around that vital point, you’ll
have a good grasp on this method.
Now, I want to add a caveat here. This is not saying that
individual Christians who have adhered to Classical, Evidential, etc., methods
do not believe that the Bible is the supreme authority—many of them do! Remember,
I was in this camp too at one stage (keep in mind this is not a salvation
issue, but an apologetic methodology issue)! What I’m clarifying is that the
methods of Evidential and Classical (and the other lesser methods) do not treat
the Bible as the supreme starting point and the absolute authority that it is
in the apologetic.
This was one reason that I personally needed to step back from the Classical and Evidential arguments that I once used! I realized that as soon as I used those types of unbiblical methods, I automatically assumed that God wasn’t the authority that He is and tried to argue from an autonomous perspective, basically stating that maybe “some sort of god” existed. (Boy was I wrong!)
I knew that I needed to get back to God and His Word as the absolute authority and be more reverent to God and His Word when looking at every subject. Then I had a proper perspective on how to use evidence and philosophy. As another point of note, some mistakenly think that the Presuppositional method doesn't use evidence, which is hogwash.
The Presuppositional/Transcendental method commonly uses evidence, but not in the same way that the Evidential or Classical models use it. It is used as confirmatory.
The Meat Of It: What Exactly Is The TAG?
So again, the TAG method, interestingly, isn’t an argument
per se but rather the basis for where all
argumentation can begin and be sustained. The Bible says wisdom and
knowledge beginning with the fear of the Lord who has all wisdom (omnisapience)
and all knowledge (omniscience)
· The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, But fools despise wisdom and instruction. (Proverbs 1:7, NKJV)
· In whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. (Colossians 2:3, NKJV)
In other words, if you reject God, then you’re reduced to
foolishness and absurdity. If one responds, saying that “you can’t use the
Bible since you haven’t shown the Bible is true or that God exists”, then they
have already missed the power of the argument. The Bible must be predicated for
meaning, objections, argumentation,
logic, knowledge, and truth to exist in the first place.
Simply put, the truth of the Bible must be the foundation,
otherwise you couldn’t know anything at all. And yet, ironically the unbeliever
(inconsistent to his worldview) makes knowledge claims that are against
the Bible! For instance, when an unbeliever says: “I can’t trust the Bible
because of X, Y, and Z…”, they are making knowledge and truth claims without a
basis.
Did you notice that even the concept of an objection is predicated on the Bible
being true? So, for someone to object to the Bible, he must [inadvertently] borrow
from the truthfulness of the Bible to make said objection! Furthermore, by way
of analysis, the unbeliever making the objection is assuming he (as a fallible creature)
is in a position of authority above the all-knowing, all-powerful,
all-present Creator God!
You see, the objector is being arbitrary when he wants
everyone to accept his authority as “supreme” (without question!) while at the
same time objecting to God, who is the actual supreme authority. If an
apologist wanted to take this to a whole other level, he could easily reverse
the objector’s same argument right back at him, “you can’t use any of your arguments
because you haven’t been proven true
or provided a basis for truth.” (Note the power of a presuppositional thrust!)
Although, as Christian apologists, I suggest being kinder in
our response or approach. A good, proper response, considering TAG, could be
something like, “I’m glad you believe the biblical principles that truth and
argumentation exist, but you are giving up your worldview to borrow from God
when you do this.”
For someone to object, he must give up his worldview and borrow the Bible’s truthfulness for
truth, logic, knowledge, love, and so on to exist. Unbelievers almost always
don’t realize this reality, so you will likely have to point it out at least a
few times, in a few different ways—kindly and respectfully, of course. But when
they object, they are essentially acknowledging that their worldview fails.
And it’s not just an atheistic worldview that fails. In
fact, every worldview outside of biblical Christianity fails to truly
provide a basis for logic, knowledge, truth, science, morality, and so on—because
they are all ultimately based on man’s (Not God’s) word.
For instance, all man-made religions, worldviews, cults, and
philosophical systems can be broken into four general categories under the “umbrella”
of man’s word (For extensive details, see World
Religions and Cults, a three-volume set by Master Books and edited by Bodie
Hodge and Roger Patterson). These four breakdowns are:
· Spirit-only systems (Eastern Mysticism/monism—all is one and all is spirit)
· Material-only systems (secular/atheistic/materialistic religions)
· Moralistic religions (just arbitrarily follow a moral code like Confucianism, Buddhism, Wicca, mythologies, etc.)
· Counterfeits of Christianity (such as Judaism, Muslims, Latter-Day Saints [Mormons], Jehovah’s Witnesses, and so on)
The four religious styles must subtly or openly borrow many
things from the Bible. For example, let’s just use logic for a moment. Can any
Eastern mysticism religion (such as Hinduism) account for logic? Since “all is
one”, then that means being logical and illogical (plus existing and not
existing) are one and the same. So, logic cannot even begin to make
sense given that worldview!
In the “material-only systems” like atheism, agnosticism,
naturalism, evolutionism, and so on, they cannot account for logic because
logic is immaterial. Thus, if they are consistent with their
materialistic beliefs, then logic (or truth, knowledge, intelligence, premises,
conclusions, etc.) can’t exist (they are not material remember) and therefore, no
arguments can be made! (By the way, this is why famous atheist Gordon Stein was left
speechless in the debate with Greg Bahnsen who was using TAG—since Stein's worldview couldn’t
even account for why he was there!)
Moralistic religions don’t have a basis from their god,
gods, or no god systems (i.e., no revelations), which means they have no objective
standard for why they need to logically adhere to some sort of moral code based
on human opinions—or why logic should exist in the first place. Notice how this
defeats the purpose of logic and morality in their religions right from the
start—since it cannot be known if logic is absolute and invariant. Thus, in
moralistic religions, their arbitrary beliefs can change with any given person
and at any given time.
Counterfeits of Christianity do something a bit different
than these others—they openly borrow from the Bible’s truthfulness for
logic, morality, truth, and so on. They just want to add or subtract from
Scripture, or reinterpret it heavily, thus severely compromising the Word of
God. But in doing so, they unwittingly reveal that the Bible is the authority,
and their alleged additions or removals of Scriptures are without warrant and
are to be judged as errant by previous Scripture.
To come back to the point, all other religions fall short of
giving a basis for the existence of
logic (and so many other things). Simply put, they must borrow from the Bible
just to argue against it; therefore, these other views are false. (These other
religions will be discussed in more detail in a following chapter.)
TAG Really Is Powerful
The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God is that
the God of the 66 books of the Bible is the basis for allowing all
argumentation to proceed. In summary:
· Because the God of truth exists, truth exists.
· Because the God of love exists, love exists.
· Because the logical and reasoning God exists, logic and reasoning exists.
· Because the all-knowing God exists, knowledge exists.
And being made in the image of our all-knowing, logical God
of truth and love gives us the ability to recognize truth, logic, knowledge,
and so on. In the TAG, God exists and His Word is predicated as true just to
begin any argument, debate, proof, and so on. In negative terms, if the God of
the Bible did not exist and His Word wasn’t true, then it would be impossible
to know or prove anything at all. Greg
Bahnsen once wrote:
“What is the presuppositional
starting point? Here the Christian apologist, defending his ultimate
presuppositions, must be prepared to argue the impossibility of the contrary—that is, to argue that the
philosophic perspective of the unbeliever destroys meaning, intelligence, and
the very possibility of knowledge, while the Christian faith provides the only
framework and conditions for the intelligible experience and rational
certainty. The apologist must content that the true starting point of thought cannot be other than God and His
revealed word, for no reasoning is possible apart from that ultimate authority.
Here and only here does one find the genuinely unquestionable starting point.”[8]
(emphasis in original)
So, by the impossibility of the
contrary, the Bible is true and the God of the Bible exists.
□
Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist
since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website.
He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker,
writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers
News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.
Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in
2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a
501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in
churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.
[1]
Romans 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their
knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are
not fitting. NKJV.
[2] 2
Corinthians 3:14 But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil
remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil
is taken away in Christ; and 2 Thessalonians 2:11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie. NKJV.
[3]
Ephesians 4:18 having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the
life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness
of their heart. NKJV.
[4]
Colossians 1:21 And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by
wicked works, yet now He has reconciled. NKJV.
[5] 1
Timothy 6:5 useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the
truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw
yourself. NKJV.
[6]
Romans 2:14-16 for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the
things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves,
who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also
bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else
excusing them) in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by
Jesus Christ, according to my gospel. NKJV.
[7] 2
Timothy 2:25-26 in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God
perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that
they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having
been taken captive by him to do his will. NKJV.
[8]
Greg Bahnsen, Always Ready, Covenant Media Press, Nocogdoches, Texas, Sixth
Printing, 1996, pp. 72-73.
