Here’s the trilemma
FREE: One semester spiritual transformation for children and young people
https://freegospelmusic.org/by-grace-through-faith-homeschool-course/
FREE: One semester spiritual transformation for adults
https://freegospelmusic.org/by-grace-through-faith-devotional/
Here’s the trilemma (3 bad choices):
Naturalists have three possible foundations for thought: infinite regression, circular reasoning, and axiomatic thinking (bare claims). These are all fallacies. There’s no truth value in any of them. That creates a problem for syllogistic thinking and science. In essence, Agrippa was claiming to know no one can know anything about anything.
I discussed the trilemma in more depth in the three-volume set titled Real Faith & Reason. I’ll give a short description here. If you want to know more, you can download that three-volume set for free from RealReality.org/downloads.
Five Choices, Not Three
Fortunately, Agrippa’s trilemma is wrong. It’s a false trilemma. The trilemma refutes itself. It falls into the pit it dug for others. Agrippa used one of the three fallacies of the trilemma when he claimed the trilemma exists. Therefore, his trilemma is self-refuting. It disproved itself. That’s just one problem.
Here is a simple example of the self-refuting logic:
1. Take Naturalism as an Axiom. (unproven statement taken as fact without evidence)
2. Commit the Axiomatic Thinking Fallacy. (Make up stuff)
3. Use that Fallacy to Claim “Only 3 Choices Exist.”
Agrippa also missed some information. His trilemma eliminated two choices that go beyond the three he proposed. Five choices exist, not three. The reason he missed two choices is he took the philosophy of Naturalism as an axiom. He committed the axiomatic thinking fallacy. Then he used that fallacy to claim only three choices exist. The trilemma has three horns. One horn is the axiomatic thinking fallacy. That’s why the trilemma refutes itself. And Agrippa left out the two choices that aren’t naturalistic. The trilemma assumes Naturalism. Assumption is one flavor of axiomatic thinking fallacy.
The trilemma only limits ungodly thinkers. Ungodly thinkers take Naturalism as an axiom. Naturalism eliminates the chance for ungodly thinkers to be rational. That makes the trilemma irrational since it’s the product of ungodly thinking. The trilemma leaves out the supernatural. It leaves out divine revelation and demonic influence as possible foundations for thinking. Of those two, only divine revelation can get you to truth.
If you eliminate the axiom of Naturalism, you have the freedom to examine the other two choices. Those two choices are divine revelation and demonic influence.
Then, you have five choices. If you choose infinite regression, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking (a fancy way of saying making up stuff), your reasoning will always be irrational. That leaves the two choices: demonic influence or divine revelation.
Demonic influence is real. Part of Naturalism denies this reality. However, this denial of demons also depends on axiomatic thinking. And the denial of demons is also an assertion contrary to fact. Spirits are involved in Wicca, witchcraft, Satanism, the occult, paganism, Neopaganism, religions with multiple gods, religions following impersonal gods, and New Age religions. Those who conjure demons know the demons are real by their experiences with those demons. They might call them helpers, familiar spirits, gods, or other names. They’re demons.
Demonic influence is dangerous. It cannot lead to truth. Therefore, demonic influence will always result in irrational thinking. Demons can be extremely clever and deceptive. They answer to Satan who is the father of all lies.
#SonsOfGod #SpiritualTransformation #HearingGodsVoice #Manifestation






