Thinking is Either Based on Made-Up Stuff or Divine Revelation
When people go beyond what God has revealed, the only option is making stuff up.
Have you noticed that evolutionists never try to prove that the stories of evolutionism actually happened? Rather, they argue that these stories are possible. Could you imagine being accused of committing a crime and being convicted based on the fact that it would have been possible for you to have committed the crime? Somehow, that sounds like some to the corruption that now has invaded a corrupted justice system. However, it’s not rational. It’s insane.
Evolutionism starts with a simple axiom: anything is possible.
Therefore, the stories of naturalism and evolutionism are possible. Therefore, naturalism is probable. Therefore, naturalism is a fact and an axiom. Therefore, all explanations must conform to naturalism, which means that God is excluded. Therefore, the stories of evolutionism are the only acceptable explanation of origins. Therefore, the stories of evolutionism are probable. Therefore, the stories of evolutionism constitute a fact and an axiom that we must use to interpret all observations. Therefore, when we observe something that conflicts with any of the stories of evolutionism, we must deny the observation or develop an additional story to make the new observation fit into the stories of evolutionism.
Well, let’s turn the same searchlight on the creationists? Let’s each examine our own hearts on this matter. Are we starting with axioms and working toward a conclusion that God created the heavens and the earth? If so, we’re saying, “I made this up. Based on this made-up stuff, God created the heavens and the earth.”
We know because the Bible says so. But how do we know that the Bible is accurate? Are we also starting with axioms to claim that the Bible is accurate? Are we using circumstantial evidence rather than a true premise? No.
We know that the Bible is accurate and trustworthy because we know the God Who wrote the Bible. He speaks to us. When we were born again, our spirits were joined to His Spirit. He communicates to us through our spirits to our souls. Our souls are our minds. The word “soul” is a synonym for the word “mind.” We know that the Bible is accurate and trustworthy because Christ speaks this truth into our minds. We might say that He speaks this into our hearts, but “heart” is also a synonym for “mind.”
Whenever we’re challenged on the point, we go back to Him, and He confirms it to us again. Not only that but every time we read Scripture or hear someone reading it, He speaks to us through the Scripture. We don’t lean on our own understanding, but we stand in the presence of the King of kings and hear His voice as He speaks through Scripture. When we look at creation or read the Scripture, we ask Him to correct any misunderstandings we may have, and He does this little by little to the extent that we’re able to yield to Him.
The argument between evolutionists and creationists isn’t about the scientific observations. We all have the same creation that we’re observing. The argument is between made-up stuff and divine revelation.
Sometimes, we don’t understand what God is doing. Things come into our lives, and we ask, “Why?” And yet, we’re assured that God knows exactly what He’s doing. He shows us the big picture, but we may not understand it. When the Hebrew children started walking around Jericho, they didn’t know what was going to happen. They knew that God was going to give them the land that was now inhabited by the evil decedents of Ham, but God just told them to march around the city once a day for seven days and to blow the trumpets on the seventh day. They were obedient, and the walls fell.
In the same way, we don’t know what God is doing at each moment in our lives. However, He’s given us His overall vision of what He’s doing. He’s working everything for His good purpose. Consider Romans 8:28-29:
“And we know that God works all things together for the good of those who love Him, who are called according to His purpose. For those God foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brothers.”
God is orchestrating everything in our lives for our good, for the purpose that He has for us because He has a plan to transfigure us into the image of His Son. That’s no small task when we consider what we’re like right now. We aren’t very godlike. We’re often disobedient to Him, and it seems as if we slip into sin very easily.
But God has a plan.
He plans that to change us from glory to glory. We read in 2 Corinthians 3:18:
“And we all having been unveiled in face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image, from glory to glory, even as from the Lord, the Spirit.”
Through this verse, God tells us a little bit about His process for changing us, for transforming us, for transfiguring us. When God speaks and we listen, faith comes. Faith gives us access to His grace, and grace does His righteousness through us, but we must yield the members of our bodies to His grace instead of yielding to our fleshly natures. When we do, our fleshly nature loses its grip on us. We become less enslaved by it. At the same time, the Holy Spirit builds up Christ within us. This process of dying to self and living to Christ is the process of spiritual maturity.
When God speaks, He speaks a vision of His hope. We look as if looking into a mirror, and see who we are in Christ. We each see the ministry that He has created us to be. It may be unclear, but we see a glimpse of it moment by moment as He speaks. We also see the body of Christ with all the gifts, ministries, offices, and orders. We see our brothers and sisters but not after the flesh. We see them after the spirit. We see a glimpse of the ministry in each one. Not only that, but we see how we fit into the body of Christ and what we’re supposed to be doing right now.
God doesn’t show us everything at once. He gives us what we need for each moment. If we yield to His Spirit in the moment, He gives us power both to will and to do His good pleasure. He knows the plans that He has for us, plans of good and not of evil. He imparts His gift of righteousness to us.
All of this has one purpose: our transfiguration into the image of His Son.
Something in the nature of reality prevents God from just fixing us without our involvement. He doesn’t force Himself on us. He waits for us to yield ourselves to Him willingly. That means that the process is slow since our fleshly wills are strong and the flesh wants its own way.
Wouldn’t it be nice if we could just have a theoretical faith and theoretical obedience? We would just tell God that we love Him and that we trust Him. Then we would commit ourselves to doing His will. No trouble would ever come our way. We would never be tested, tried, or tempted. However, that wouldn’t finish the work that God has for us. We must choose to obey Him in spite of the test, trial, or temptation.
Gold is a type of deity. God tells us a lot about refining gold in Scripture. We have Christ abiding within us ever since we were born again. Since that moment, we’ve been in a war between the flesh and our spirits—our spirits have been forever joined to the Spirit of Christ. Christ is deity, which is typified by gold. But the Gold must be refined, and gold is refined by heating it.
When we obey the Holy Spirit under the heat of the test, trial, or temptation, the Holy Spirit makes increase of our gold, which is Christ in us. At the same time, our fleshly nature dies a little. Theoretical obedience isn’t enough. We must be found faithful in the fire. However, the reward isn’t worthy to be compared to the glory that God will reveal in us.
For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. ~ Romans 8:18
Truth is simple. If we’re having trouble understanding the truth, we’re not thinking correctly. That doesn’t mean that we can know everything. It doesn’t mean that God hasn’t created a complex universe. It does mean that what God reveals is simple, but human minds can add or remove a little information from what God reveals, and then it seems confusing.
Ungodly thinking is thinking without God. Of course, we need to allow God to remind us that He reveals reality to humanity through Scripture and every means mentioned in Scripture. That means that God reveals His nature through the things that He has created just as He says He does when He speaks to us through the first chapter of Romans. It means that He speaks to us through brothers and sisters in Christ just as He says that He does when He speaks to us through the twelfth chapter of First Corinthians. He even tells us a little bit about how to discern between someone who is speaking by the Holy Spirit and someone who is speaking by a different spirit.
As we walk in the Spirit, we listen to God’s voice. When we hear Him and acknowledge Him, His faith comes. He tells us that Jesus Christ is the Author and Finisher of this faith, and we are not. This faith is substance. God tells us that through Scripture. What God says is a fact. What is substance? The Greek word from which “substance” is translated means “reality as opposed to concept.” So many people get confused and think that this faith is like the make-believe faith that ungodly thinkers have. God goes on to tell us that this faith is evidence, but what does “evidence” mean? The Greek word from which “evidence” is translated means “absolutely certain proof.” When God speaks, we can know that whatever He says is true.
Appeal to Consequence Fallacy
“If we continue to eschew science, eschew the process, and try to divide science into observational science and historic science, we aren’t going to move forward, we’ll not embrace natural laws, we’ll not make discoveries, we’ll not invent and innovate and stay ahead.
Now, one last thing, you may not know that in the U.S. Constitution, from the Founding Fathers, is the sentence: to promote the progress of science and useful arts. Kentucky voters, voters who might be watching online, in places like Texas, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Kansas, please, you don’t want to raise a generation of science students who don’t understand how we know our place in the cosmos, our place in space, who don’t understand natural law. We need to innovate to keep the United States where it’s in the world.” ~ Bill Nye
Bill committed an appeal to consequences fallacy. Appeal to consequence is a fallacy because consequences can’t change reality. He also committed an appeal to fear fallacy. Fear can’t change reality either. Making this line of reasoning even more ridiculous, the consequences Bill proposed weren’t realistic, but even if they had been realistic, consequences have no power to change reality. In other words, it’s not sane to deny reality simply because of a consequence. This consequence could be real or imagined. Therefore, Bill’s imagined and unrealistic consequence isn’t proof against God, doesn’t prove the ungodly origins story, and doesn’t disprove God’s account of origins.
Bill points to a consequence, but his supposed consequence is an absurd extrapolation. We know that we won’t suffer this consequence since young-earth creationists started most branches of science. These were scientists who didn’t believe in the ungodly origins story, which shows that scientists who don’t believe in the sacred-cow story have made tremendous scientific progress. Bill’s supposed consequence is a phantom consequence. It’s not going to happen, and Bill’s prophecy is silly.
Then there’s the following framing fallacy, which is also an appeal to consequence fallacy:
“If we continue to eschew science, eschew the process, and try to divide science into observational science and historic science, we aren’t going to move forward.” ~ Bill Nye
This statement implies that certain relationships exist, but those relationships don’t exist. Dividing science into observational science and historical storytelling is discerning the difference between observation and creative stories about the distant past. The term “historical science” is really just historical storytelling. Bill claims that knowing the difference between observation and storytelling will stop progress. He claims that knowing the difference between what scientists have observed and what scientists have made up is the same thing as deliberately avoiding science and the scientific method.
So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. ~ Romans 10:17
Literally, So then belief comes by hearing and hearing by the utterance of God.
God speaks through Scripture and through every means mentioned in Scripture.
By whom [Jesus] also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. Romans 5:2
So, grace is through faith and faith gives us access to grace–and only by grace can we stand.
But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. ~ 1 Corinthians 15:10
So, grace does the works of righteousness. Whatever I do on my own is filthy rags. But He can do works through me and speak through me.
Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. Romans 6:13
Our part is to yield and allow God to do righteousness through us.
Everything else is sin:
whatsoever is not of faith is sin. Romans 14:23b
Whatever God didn’t tell us to do and do through us by grace, which is through faith, is sin.
Ungodly thinkers have a secret weapon called confusion. By creating confusion, ungodly thinkers can fool many people. I pulled out a new weapon to counter the confusion. The new weapon is an old weapon called “flowcharting.” Whenever you want to understand something complex or confusing, give flowcharting a try.
A previous post called “The Atheist God Complex” can be found here. In that post, I answered an over-confident atheist using a flowchart. The reason I used a flowchart is that he was using a common atheistic debate tactic known as creating confusion. Flowcharts organize thoughts. In this case, the flowchart exposed the butterfly logic of the atheist. Well, the atheist wasn’t going to let it go at that. He came right back last night with the following three posts that were just as irrational as his original post. So, each of those posts needed to be answered using a flowchart. He gave every indication that he was going to be back with more, but he suddenly disappeared. Did he leave to seek counsel from his ungodly network? Did he want to limit the damage to his atheistic evangelism campaign? Who knows, but here is the continuing discussion.
Notice that Sandbuilders comments almost seem sane until we analyze them and realize that they’re just more made-up stuff and smokescreen fallacies. Enjoy.
Sandbuilder: For convenience, I will assume numbering from 1 to 10. Please use these as reference so we don’t get lost. I won’t necessarily go in order, or all in one go:
#3. You misunderstand the point. Even if we assume that a god exists, and has the necessary wisdom to authenticate his message, that doesn’t mean that any Person X who claims to have an authenticated message from God, has actually received a message from God. Your point requires that everyone has an authenticated message from God to compare the fakes to, which almost no Christian believes, or else there wouldn’t be missionary projects or apologetics.
If people can still be fooled by counterfeit “gods” than any claims of divine messages are suspect. We do not, as a species, have the capacity to truly know God from a fake, and the tremendous amount of fakes that people give 100% of their faith in are overwhelming evidence of this.
For an example: Look at all those people who buy into rapture scares. How many times do you see people selling all their belongings, expecting to be raptured, even after so many other rapture call have proven false. Virtually all claim to have received revelation (through interpreting scripture) Now, assuming that the date of the rapture can be delivered by God does not mean that any of the people claiming to have the date right, in fact do. This is not a slight on God’s power, its a comment on your own fallibility: It is far more likely that a person has been fooled into believing a god talked to them than having an actual god talk to them, just statistically.
Sandbuilder: #1 You misunderstand how axioms work. An axiom is a starting point for reasoning. Axioms do not have to be true to work, but they do need to be true for the results of your reasoning to be consistent with reality. For example, you can reason from “God is necessary for reason” as your own axiom, which you take to be true, and arrive at various conclusions. Those conclusions however are not binding to anyone that doesn’t share your axiom. And it is your axiom, not God’s, as you’re the one reasoning here, not God. You’re as bound by axiomatic thinking as everybody else.
Sandbuilder: #6 – #8 Jesus has not in fact revealed himself and his trustworthiness to every person already. He as not done so to me, so this is simply an untrue claim.
I was a member of a Christian church until I was 30. Now, you don’t have to take this as meaning I was definitely a True Follower, from your standpoint, but I did pray, and I did believe in god at the time. A message from God then would have swayed earlier me far more easily than older skeptic me.
Now, Sandbuilder has disappeared. Where he went, we don’t know, but he may return. If he does, I’ll keep you posted.
In a world that’s full of terror and fear, we can have full confidence in our Lord Jesus Christ. He’s our protector and defender. And yet, we do sometimes fear, don’t we? What’s the answer? How can we always be confident and fearless?
The question is like the question of a child who asks, “How can I be big.” We want to be mature and complete, but maturity takes time. The Bible says that we go from glory to glory and from faith to faith. It’s a progressive experience and an ever new and exciting way. As we go through many testings, the Holy Spirit imparts a greater measure of faith. We have less of the fearful nature and more of the confident, fearless nature of Christ. We just need to keep on keeping on.
Naturalism is Another Way to Say “No God.”
Naturalism is an assumption that ungodly thinkers accept as an axiom. The term “axiom” means that they are just going to believe it and never question it. Naturalism makes many claims. One of those claims is that God does nothing, that He has no impact on His creation. It’s not the same as the philosophy of materialism or the philosophy of atheism, but it’s closely related since all of these are aspects of ungodliness.
What’s the opposite of Naturalism? Godliness is exactly the opposite of naturalism, atheism, and materialism. But what is godliness? What do ungodly people say about it? Google thinks that godliness is the quality of being devoutly religious.
Ungodly people can’t bear to think about Jesus Christ as a real person, so they try to put in into various boxes. They put Him into a box called religious. They have another box called theology and another one called doctrine, but none of those is the Creator God. None of those is Jesus Christ.
God speaks to us through the Bible, and He says that He’s working toward the day when He’ll conform us to the image of Christ.
And we know that God works all things together for the good of those who love Him, who are called according to His purpose. For those God foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brothers. ~ Romans 8:28-29
We may not be very well conformed to the image of Christ right now, but God has a plan. In His plan, we will be conformed to Christ’s image. We’ll be in submission to Him to the point that we never rebel against Him in anything. That starts with being born again, which mainly affects our spirits but seems to affect our minds/souls also. The present battle is for the mind, and it has to do with reason. God says, “Come, let us reason together.”
As it works out, rational thought is impossible without Jesus Christ, and rational thought is impossible without faith. You may not have ever heard anyone tell you this, but every pastor everywhere ought to be telling people about this. It has to do with the way God designed logic. Logic is all about what we can know. By the way, the word “logic” comes from a Greek word “logos.” You may have heard about “logos” since it’s a Greek word in the Bible that refers to Christ. “Logos” means “utterance.”
Another Greek word also means “utterance,” and that Greek word is “rhema.” Both of these words that mean “utterance” are usually translated as “word.” “In the beginning was the logos.” “In the beginning was the word.” “Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the rhema of God.” Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.”
Faith comes by hearing the utterance of God. God speaks through Scripture and every means that He mentions in Scripture. When He speaks, faith comes. Speaking through the Bible, God says that faith is substance. Here, the word “substance” means reality as opposed to concept. And yet, ungodly thinkers try to confuse that issue. They try to make it seem as though faith is conceptual rather than substantial. God also says that faith is evidence, and, in this case, “evidence” means absolutely certain proof. And yet, ungodly thinkers try to insinuate that faith is the act of believing without any evidence. The reason that faith is substance and evidence is that it comes when God speaks. Whatever God says is a fact. Whether He speaks to us through the Bible, a pastor, our consciences, our intuitions, His creation, or any other means, what He says is a fact. As we mature in Christ, we’re better able to discern between His voice and all the other voices out there. But we must focus on Him. Whoever seeks Him finds Him, and we continually find Him more completely as He transfigures us into the image of Christ.
When ungodly thinkers say that faith isn’t substance and faith isn’t evidence, they’re projecting the problems of their ungodly thinking onto those who follow Christ. The only way to be rational is to follow Christ, and the reason is very simple. Rational thought must have a starting point, and that starting point must be true. The starting point can’t be made-up stuff.
However, ungodly thinkers have no way to have a starting point that’s true. Each time they come up with something that they think is true, they have to come up with a reason that they think it’s true. So they look for something that’s true to prove whatever they claimed was true. They end up in an infinite regression of unproved proofs. They can’t escape this, so they use axioms. Axioms are claims that they make up and believe to be true without proof. They do this very cleverly, so it seems to make sense unless we really press them. When we press them, we find that they’re very hard to pin down. Once we pin them down, they’ll finally admit that they’re making the whole thing up, but then they’ll accuse us of having their same problem.
We don’t have their same problem. We have Christ. We’re learning to hear His voice and to respond in submission. This process of submitting to the point of letting Him do His works through us by grace—this process is what makes us mature. With maturity comes increasing discernment. On this Road (Christ), we may make honest mistakes, but God sees our hearts and that we’re seeking Him, so He picks us back up if we fall. If we leave the Road for a moment, He’ll put us back on track. As long as we’re humble before Him, He’ll see it through. If it depended on us, we would be lost, but we have a great and loving God Who takes care of us.
I continually have conversations with atheists, evolutionists, and other such ungodly thinkers where the conversation follows what has now become a familiar course. The reasoning goes like this: I know that God doesn’t exist (or God doesn’t reveal anything to anyone or God doesn’t speak through Scripture, or God doesn’t reveal Himself to me, or the stories of evolutionism happened, or the earth is billions of years old, or something else). It starts with a bare claim, usually with some form of smokescreen fallacy.
From there, I tell them that God speaks to me and to everyone who follows Christ. He speaks through Scripture and every means that God mentions in Scripture. He tells me that Scripture is accurate and that I can continue to know Christ better as I listen to Him and respond in willing submission. I’ll also note that a true premise is needed to prove any conclusion, and a true premise is impossible without divine revelation. What God says is a fact. What I say will vary depending on what God gives me to say, but it will say something like that.
The ungodly thinker will then argue that his or her reasoning is based on a true premise—that the ungodly thinker can self-generate true premises from nothing. This argument can take many forms, but it’s always a defense of the ungodly thinker’s made-up stuff. At the same time, while basing all thinking on made-up stuff, the ungodly thinker will claim to know that no follower of Christ can really hear Christ’s voice. This argument usually goes to the point of claiming that, because of human weakness, God can’t possibly communicate with human beings in a meaningful way. Of course, the ungodly thinker is basing this entire argument on made-up stuff.
Have I seen any of these ungodly thinkers turn to Christ as a result of these conversations? No. Even when they admit that they’re making up their entire argument, they refuse to turn to Christ. When I invite them to know Christ and verify His existence that way, they refuse to seek Him. Often, they will flippantly say, “OK. I tried seeking Him, and nothing happened.” Mostly, they ignore the invitation, which is apparently very scary for them.
In many cases, the evolutionist, atheist, or other ungodly thinker will create a convoluted argument that follows a kind of butterfly logic. It becomes difficult to pin them down to find out the basis of their thoughts. When I’m able to pin them down, they have some kind of justification for basing all their thoughts on made-up stuff. Based on this made-up stuff, they rationalize that they can know that no one can know God.
What can we learn from this?
I’m posting this conversation because it’s an excellent example of the convoluted and deceptive reasoning that comes from the fallen human mind. Those who are familiar with my blog are aware that the human mind has no way to self-generate truth. It can’t conjure up truth without a source for truth. It can react to its environment in the same way that an earthworm can react to its environment or a raccoon can react to its environment. It can’t find a way to reason to a conclusion beyond that environment. For instance, it can do science, which is always pragmatic and practical. It can’t reason rationally about right, wrong, the nature of knowledge, spiritual matters, or the nature of reality. It can’t even prove the existence of a real world. God, on the other hand, reveals right, wrong, the nature of knowledge, spiritual matters, the nature of reality, and the fact that the world around us is real.
The most irrational arguments are the hardest to refute. The refutation tends to become long and hard to follow because of the irrationality of the original argument. Here’s the conversation, but we’ll stop once in a while for critical thinking:
Rockbuilder: Ungodly thinking can’t possibly produce a rational thought that leads to a true conclusion. The problem of infinite regression prevents ungodly thinking from having a true premise. Without a true premise, rational thought is impossible. Only divine revelation can provide a true premise.
Sandbuilder: You don’t need God to have rational thought. Even if a supreme being were necessary, Brahman could easily be the ground for it instead of God. So your last statement is a bare assertion unless you’re using “divine” loosely to allow for any supreme being.
CRITICAL THINKING ****************
Sandbuilder said, “Brahman could easily be the ground for it instead of God.” Sandbuilder just claimed that a demon is just as credible as God. This statement is patently false. Demons lie, but God can’t lie. The most important thing to know is the source of Sandbuilder’s claim. He made it up. It’s an axiomatic thinking fallacy. As we’ll see, Sandbuilder thinks it makes sense to use axiomatic thinking fallacies as the basis of reasoning. The reason that axiomatic thinking is a fallacy is that axiomatic thinking in making up stuff and then calling the made-up stuff “true.” That’s the definition of insanity.
Sandbuilder: Divine revelation is a red herring. Even if we grant that a divine revelation could provide a true premise, which already is a shaky precept, it is impossible for a fallible human to know that any given experience of divine revelation is not a case of self-deception. If you cannot tell a genuine divine revelation from a fake, you have no argument.
CRITICAL THINKING ****************
Sandbuilder said that it’s a shaky precept to say that divine revelation could provide a true premise. This is another axiomatic thinking fallacy that claims god-like omniscience. Sandbuilder is claiming that God can’t reveal knowledge. What would prevent God from doing so?
Sandbuilder said, “It is impossible for a fallible human to know that any given experience of divine revelation is not a case of self-deception.” Here is Sandbuilder, who has no way to self-generate a true premise to prove any conclusion, but now he claims to know that God can’t reveal in a way that those who follow Him know that God is God and know the difference between God’s voice and their own human minds. Satan says that you can’t know. Satan says, “Hath God said?” He said that to Eve in the Garden of Eden.
Rockbuilder: Making unsupported assertions like you just did is irrational.
Sandbuilder: Can someone receive divine revelation, but in reality be deceived?
If your answer is yes, then my point is valid.
If your answer is no, then that means all claims of revelation are true, even those from different and mutually exclusive gods.
If your answer is “For everyone except me and my god” you need to demonstrate this before you can use it as a foundation.
So you’re in the same boat as the atheists, you’re just lying to yourself about it.
CRITICAL THINKING ****************
We’ll start with Sandbuilder’s conclusion since it’s the crux of his problem. “So you’re in the same boat as the atheists.” Sandbuilder is committing a classic tu quoque fallacy stated very plainly. Tu quoque means “You too.” The reason that a tu quoque fallacy is a fallacy is that it doesn’t solve the original problem, but it’s an admission that the original problem is real. The original problem is that there is no way rationally to come to any conclusion without divine revelation. Sandbuilder just admitted that, but he said, “You too have the same problem since no one anywhere can rationally come to any conclusion.”
Why is that a problem? Sandbuilder didn’t solve his first problem, which is that he can’t come to a rational conclusion about anything because he can’t have a true premise. He believes that an axiom is enough, but axioms consist of made-up stuff. But it’s irrational to say, “I made us X, and that proves Y.” Made-up stuff can’t prove anything. Sandbuilder still has this problem. He admits it. He says, “You too have the same problem because I conclude that the Almighty God is incapable of communication in a meaningful way.”
Therefore, Sandbuilder is admitting that any conclusion is irrational, but yet he thinks that his conclusion about the limitation of Jesus Christ is rational. His conclusion that says, “Almighty God is incapable of communicating in a meaningful way,” is a claim of amazing knowledge of the spiritual realm and the nature of God. For an atheist, that’s an irrational claim. And yet, claiming to have this amazing knowledge, Sandbuilder can’t muster up a true premise for even the most simple conclusion. Of course, looking at the rest of what Sandbuilder wrote bears out his problem with reasoning.
Now, let’s examine Sandbuilder’s conclusion that takes the form of a three-pronged trilemma. We’ll look at each one and show the irrationality of all of them.
Prong #1: Can someone receive divine revelation, but in reality be deceived? If your answer is yes, then my point is valid.
No one can receive divine revelation but in reality, be deceived. He’s presupposing no God. Presupposing is a form of the axiomatic thinking fallacy. Someone can think that he or she is receiving divine revelation and be deceived, but this only happens when the person is deceived by his or her fleshly desires. And we all deceive ourselves at times. However, if we truly desire to do God’s will, He’ll correct us, we’ll receive or correction, and He’ll set us back on the right path. Every person who follows Christ has this experience of divine correction. So, the answer is No, but Sandbuilder is misstating the problem. He’s misstating the problem because he’s imagining the problem using his fallen mind that’s incapable of rational thought. In any case, Sandbuilder’s point isn’t valid.
Prong #2: Can someone receive divine revelation, but in reality be deceived? If your answer is no, then that means all claims of revelation are true, even those from different and mutually exclusive gods. That way absurdity lies.
We’ve touched on this already, but the answer is No. No one can receive divine revelation and be deceived by divine revelation. God deceives no one.
Sandbuilder’s conclusion is totally irrational, although his grammar makes his thought unclear. It is clear that he’s equating everything that humans call “a god” with the Almighty God Who created all things. That’s the type of nonsense that happens when a human being based reason on made-up stuff. Now, idols made of stone, wood, or gold cannot speak. They’re incapable of articulate speech. However, demons are created beings who have also fallen away from God just as mankind has fallen away from God. Demons speak, but they lie. God speaks, but He can’t lie.
Prong #3: Can someone receive divine revelation, but in reality be deceived? If your answer is “For everyone except me and my god” you need to demonstrate this before you can use it as a foundation.
Sandbuilder, like all people, know that Jesus Christ exists, and he knows a lot about Him. Sandbuilder knows this so well that God says that Sandbuilder is without excuse. He knows. He refuses to acknowledge Jesus Christ, the Creator God because Sandbuilder’s deeds are evil. God reveals these facts, and God doesn’t require that we “demonstrate this” to Sandbuilder since Sandbuilder already knows.
That being said, God demonstrates the fact that He can communicate and impart discernment to Rockbuilder, Sandbuilder, and every other person. That’s why Sandbuilder is without excuse. Therefore, Sandbuilder’s proposal is in error, which would be expected since he’s making the whole thing up. He was bound to get it wrong.
Notice that all three of these prongs are misstatements. They are straw man arguments that seek to frame the entire discussion inside of a lie. Someone who knows Christ can be deceived, but not by Christ. Christ is in charge of both divine revelation and discernment, so these aren’t dependent on human ability. If Satan deceives a person who knows Christ, God knows all about that and will lead that person back to Himself providing the Christ-follower sincerely wants to follow Christ. God is not equal to the lesser creatures that He created, and He’s not equal to the imagination of the human mind, but Sandbuilder presupposed that.
Rockbuilder didn’t cast these pearls before Sandbuilder, knowing that Sandbuilder wouldn’t be able to receive them. Instead, Rockbuilder just pointed out that Sandbuilder couldn’t reason to his tu quoque fallacy without first having a true premise.
Rockbuilder: You’re trying to reason beyond your immediate senses. You have no true premise for any claim, and it’s your own fault since Christ reveals Himself to every person and gives discernment between Himself and all creatures that He created. You can only know what God reveals. If you’re deceived, it’s your own fault since you want to be deceived to satisfy your flesh. But all who sincerely desire Christ receive Christ. All who ask for the Holy Spirit receive the Holy Spirit. Once they’re born again, they can be tempted, but God doesn’t tempt them. Their own flesh tempts them.
Sandbuilder: From your response, you fall on the third prong of my question, and so you need to demonstrate all of your claims before they can be seriously considered. I understand you don’t intend to, as this is what attracts people to presuppositional apologetics, thinking they can avoid this responsibility.
CRITICAL THINKING ****************
Sandbuilder just told a lie. Rockbuilder doesn’t need to demonstrate anything to Sandbuilder. God has already demonstrated this to Sandbuilder and to Rockbuilder. Not only that, but every person who seeks Christ finds Christ. Sandbuilder wouldn’t look at the evidence because he wouldn’t be able to continue in the sin that he loves. However, if Sandbuilder were to turn his life over to Jesus Christ and live in submission to Christ, Jesus Christ would demonstrate this and much more to Sandbuilder.
Rockbuilder: Nonsense. You’re way over your head. Your tu quoque doesn’t work since it’s based on made-up stuff and your desperation is trying shoehorning your faulty logic onto something that can confuse unintelligent people. Tell me something that’s not dependent on made-up stuff.
Sandbuilder: Already did, I don’t need to repeat myself. Engage with what I’m saying, rather than using your flimsy excuses not to. They are transparent.
CRITICAL THINKING ****************
Here Sandbuilder now claims to have presented a true premise. Notice the reversal since he admitted that atheists have no way to have a true premise. This is inconsistency and is irrational. He has so deceived his own mind that he thinks his bare claims are real. He’s committing the projection fallacy since he’s the one making flimsy excuses and refusing to engage with Jesus Christ, the Source of all truth.
Rockbuilder: Sorry. I don’t accept made-up stuff as the basis for reason, so I don’t accept your irrational tu quoque fallacy. In addition, God didn’t give me the responsibility to prove anything to you since you already know as I previously explained. You know. God holds you responsible.
Sandbuilder: “Sorry. I don’t accept made-up stuff as the basis for reason”
You know that’s a lie Bob, or else you wouldn’t have embraced such an evasive tactic as your primary apologetic. You cannot defend your claim, but you think you can avoid having to if you repeat it long enough.
CRITICAL THINKING ****************
Again, Sandbuilder resorts to pure made-up stuff, projection, and false bravado.
Rockbuilder: Show me a true premise, or don’t bother bringing yet another axiomatic thinking fallacy.
Sandbuilder: Already did. And btw, using axioms isn’t a fallacy.
CRITICAL THINKING ****************
Again, Sandbuilder lied about having a true premise. Then, he drops the bombshell. The reason he claims to have shown a true premise is that he thinks that making up stuff and calling the made-up stuff “true” is rational. That’s the insanity that’s common to ungodly thinking.
Rockbuilder: You have no way to prove any premise true, not even to yourself. That’s the ungodly thinking problem. It applies to every thought that’s not originated from God—including my own thoughts when I fail to yield to the Holy Spirit. So, you’re stuck without a true premise, and your smokescreen fallacies can’t help you.
Sandbuilder: You have the same problem as atheists. You cannot know that when you claim you “submit to the Holy Spirit,” you are not deceiving yourself. Indeed, if you think that you are, you ARE deceiving yourself, and you cannot avoid this. Even if your presuppositional argument had merit, you couldn’t lay claim to knowledge as you can always be fooled.
CRITICAL THINKING ****************
Now that we understand Sandbuilder’s reasoning, we see how he could say anything as foolish as what he just said. He just claimed to know about all of Rockbuilder’s inner spiritual experiences with Christ. In addition, he claimed to know that Christ is limited and unable to provide discernment and make His messages clear. Sandbuilder is suffering from a god complex. And Sandbuilder believes that whatever he makes up is truth.
Summary of the faulty atheist mindset:
- believes that whatever he makes up is truth.
- begins thinking with a presupposition of no Almighty Creator God or, at least, no way to know God.
- presupposes that God has no power to communicate and impart discernment.
- tries to project the atheistic problem onto those who follow Christ.
- asserts that he knows all about the inner spiritual experiences of every person who follows Christ.
- knows that he can’t self-generate a true premise but believes that he can self-generate a true premise.
- doesn’t admit that God has already revealed Himself to him.
The ungodly thinker returned. You won’t believe how “The Athiest God Complex Part 2” went. http://realreality.org/atheist-god-complex-2/