the Website of Timothy McCabe Follower of Christ; Student of Epistemology, Apologetics, and Theology
Home Good News Proofs Questions Presentations Software More

Rationalism

Definition

Rationalism describes any philosophy that claims that beliefs and opinions should always be logical, deductive conclusions rather than being based on experience, observations, religious teachings, or divine revelation.

Keywords: Rationalism, Philosophy, Logical, Reasoning, Deductive, Experience, Observations, Religious, Revelation, Contradictory.

Veracity

Rationalistic claims are false .

Proof

All self-refuting or contradictory claims are deductively false.

Premise 1: Only deductive conclusions should be believed.

Premise 2: Premise 1, being the foundation or starting point of the philosophy, is not itself a deductive conclusion.

Conclusion: Therefore, premise 1, also known as "rationalism", should not be believed.

Rationalistic claims, when adhered to, require the rejection of rationalistic claims. To accept them is to reject them, making rationalism inherently contradictory and deductively false.

Gilbert Guttlebocker, Defender of Dragons

Gilbert Guttlebocker, Defender of Dragons

Riveting, yet absurd; romantic, yet innocent; Gilbert Guttlebocker, Defender of Dragons is a little Roald Dahl, a little Harry Potter, and a little Chronicles of Narnia, all rolled into one. Timothy McCabe collaborates with the great Benedict Ballyhoot to bring you the novel of the century!

 

World Religions and Cults (volume 2)

In Printed Form

Along with numerous other authors including Don Landis, Bodie Hodge and Roger Patterson, Timothy McCabe contributes analyses of various world religions and cults in this volume from Master Books.

Other Writings

"Should modern mainstream religions be considered cults?"

Modern mainstream religions could be considered "cults", and every form of Atheism could as well. But why should it matter if that particular term can be applied? Why would we want to call every modern mainstream religion a "cult" apart from a desire to provoke some type of defensive emotional reaction from religious persons? And why would anyone be interested in manipulating such a reaction?
Continue reading...

"In my previous question you beautifully pointed it out yet missed it: Jesus says I have lost NONE and also (same context) lost ONE. Math contradiction, is it N/ONE?"

Thanks for the clarification. I understand your question now. The question is with regards to John 17:12 and John 18:9. In John 17:12, Jesus tells His Father that He lost one of those whom His Father gave to Him, namely, Judas Iscariot. In John 18:9, the author of John tells us that Jesus did not lose one. So which is it? One or none?
Continue reading...

"If Jesus really was God, and he shares an equal part of the trinity (meaning they are all coequal; none are above each other) then why does Jesus say in John 14:28: My Father is GREATER than I?"

Being co-equal is not intended as a mathematical equality and does not necessitate that none is in charge of another. The scriptures talk about the equality of the Father and Son in John 5:18, where John states "For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.
Continue reading...

All articles