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.

Truth is Reality

Truth sets a true course. It is the compass for all aspects of life. Opinions can lead to disaster. Truth is absolute by nature. You either know something or not. You can have a strong opinion about things that you don't know, but that's useless. To state that something is true when it's just an opinion based on interpretation of observation is to lie.

Reality and Truth

Making Things Up

Logic requires valid form and a conclusion that follows from a true premise. Generating that true premise is a problem. Premises based on axiomatic thinking are irrational. Axioms are beliefs that can’t be known yet are treated as part of reality. In the final analysis, there are only two ways to interpret observations: axiomatic thinking (made-up stuff) or Divine revelation. Any conclusion that anyone makes about anything is just an opinion if it’s based on made-up stuff.

Human-Generated Knowlege

Divine Revelation

God speaks. He speaks through Scripture and through every method mentioned in Scripture. God knows all things and cannot lie. He is the ultimate and only true authority. Whoever seeks Him finds Him. Ask Him to pardon all your times of failing to listen and obey, and you will be pardoned. Ask Him to rule over you as Lord and Savior, and you will find that the Holy Spirit leads and teaches you moment by moment.

Divine Revelation

Losing Touch with Reality

They don’t instantly lose all ability to discern good from evil and truth from error, but they lose a little bit with each resistance. Jesus is still the light of the world Who lights every person who comes into the world. We, who follow Christ, actually go back a bit whenever we sin. It hurts our relationship until we repent. For those who continually reject the leading of Christ and refuse to thank Him and glorify Him, they will come to a point where God turns fully from them and stops giving them light. They will begin to call evil good and good evil.
direct link –

Agrippa’s Trilemma and Divine Revelation

Without divine revelation, the human mind has no way to reach a logical conclusion about anything. That may sound like an overstatement, but it’s true. And this condition is unnecessary. Anyone who seeks Christ finds Him. He leads, teaches, and corrects anyone who follows Him. He supplies that basis for sound reasoning. He supplies the truth. Sound reasoning must be based on truth. Ungodly thinkers know that the human mind can’t reason to truth. The human mind can only make bare assertions. We can’t reason beyond what we can observe and test unless we have divine revelation. However, ungodly thinkers almost always want to reason beyond what they can observe and test. They want to reason about morals, ethics, the origin of the universe, what happened to the dinosaurs, God, and you name it. When they do that, they are irrational. If these ungodly thinkers have Ph. D.s, those degrees won’t help them to reason beyond what they can observe and test. A secondary problem arises. When they refuse to acknowledge Christ, they begin to lose the distinction between what they can observe and test and what they are just making up in their preconceptions. They lose the distinction between reality and make-believe.


Real Faith & Reason Volumes 1, 2, & 3


Encyclopedia of Logical Fallacies


Exposing the Nye-Ham Debate


Ad Ignorantiam Fallacy

My ignorance doesn’t prove or disprove any point. That’s the crux of the ad ignorantiam fallacy. This fallacy often takes the form of a question in debates. “Let me ask you a question, and, if you can’t answer it to my satisfaction, that proves that I’m right and you’re wrong.” Of course, it proves nothing of the kind.
There is a rational way to use questions in a discussion. Ken Ham gave a perfect example. Ken Ham asked Bill Nye if he knew of any piece of useful technology that required the theory of evolution to develop the technology. This question points out the fact that evolutionists equivocate on the word “science.” They mix useful science that leads to helpful technologies with useless storytelling about an imagined past. That’s a package deal fallacy that packs observation, trial and error, and testing into the same word “science” with fanciful storytelling. Observation, trial and error, and testing are not the same thing as fanciful storytelling. The fact that Bill Nye was unable to give any example of such a technology shows that Bill Nye has no basis for his dogmatic belief and his claim that the Creation Model should be censored. It does not, however, disprove the stories of evolutionism. Divine revelation disproves the stories of evolutionism.
Ken used several such questions that hit at the root of Bill’s dogmatic belief system. On the other hand, Bill never asked a question that struck at the root of the Christian belief and trust in God and the history God reveals through the Bible. If Bill had been able to stump Ken Ham with any of his ad ignorantiam questions (which he was not able), it would not have taken away the basis for our belief. We know Christ exists because we know Christ. We know the history in the Bible is correct and accurate because Christ speaks into our innermost minds and assures us that the Bible is His utterance and that it’s without error. This is absolute knowledge and assurance because it’s not based on any assumptions. It’s based firmly on the only Foundation that can be laid, which is Jesus Christ. That Foundation isn’t shaken because we don’t know some detail about how God did something. We don’t depend on dogma. We depend on Christ. Evolutionism depends on dogma.
Not only that, but anyone can check out this divine revelation. Some people claim that no one can check out divine revelation. In fact, anyone can check out divine revelation since everyone who seeks Christ finds Christ. Christ leads, teaches, and corrects everyone who follows Him. He never contradicts Himself. The stories of evolutionism are called “science” but are uncheckable. The divine revelation that God created the heavens and the earth and sent the global flood is called “religion” but are checkable. Go figure.

False Consensus Fallacy

Ungodly thinkers often mention a consensus. We hear that all the time.

A consensus of scientists agrees that the earth is 4.7 billion years old.

A consensus of scientists agrees of evolution. It’s a scientific fact.

A consensus of scientists agrees on global warming.

A consensus is an agreement that everyone can live with. It usually involves some compromise, but everyone must agree or there is no consensus. There is no consensus among scientists regarding the age of the earth or the origin of the earth. There is a majority, but a majority isn’t a consensus. I’m getting to point with this. Be patient with me.

So they have a majority. They call it a consensus because it sounds more convincing. But it’s a lie. Here we have more than three fallacies. The three obvious ones are an appeal to popularity, an assertion contrary to fact, and an equivocation fallacy.

However, ungodly thinkers must always use fallacies when trying to reason to a conclusion. Since they have no path to true premises, they’re forced to use fallacies. At some level, every time they try to use logic, they base their logic, and thus, their conclusion, on claims of which they are not certain. That’s because the only certain truth comes by divine revelation. In other words, the claim is not known to be true. It may be true.

When anyone makes a claim, that person is asserting that the claim is true. To assert that a claim is true without knowing whether it’s true is to lie. Logic comes to a conclusion and claims that the conclusion is true based on something that is supposed to prove the conclusion to be true. But when the proof doesn’t prove the conclusion, a deception has taken place. These deceptions can be very subtle.

Making any claim without absolutely knowing that the claim is true is known as an axiomatic thinking fallacy. Axioms are things we say or believe that we can’t prove and that no one has proved to us. Axioms are taken as facts without proof. There are various types of axiomatic thinking fallacies, and all of those names for fallacies and definitions of fallacies are not important. What’s important is that bare claims without absolute proof are lies.

This means that ungodly thinking always is based on fallacies. Fallacies are lies or methods of lying. The root fallacy is always some form of axiomatic thinking fallacy. It might be a bald-faced lie. It might be an unsupported premise. It could be an unsupported claim. Or it could be any number of other axiomatic thinking fallacies. These axiomatic thinking fallacies are seldom committed without at least one smokescreen fallacy. Smokescreen fallacies are fallacies that make axiomatic thinking seem as if it were sane when it’s not sane. It’s not sane to believe that something is true when we have no way to prove it. Smokescreen fallacies include circular reasoning, appeal to emphatic statements, appeal to presentation, red herring fallacies, changing the subject, and many more. Smokescreen fallacies give the illusion that made-up stuff is real stuff.

Satan’s war is against our minds. His only weapon is lies. He binds us up will many lies. Jesus Christ is the truth. In Him, all wisdom, truth, knowledge, and understanding reside. We can easily see why no wisdom, truth, knowledge or understanding can exist without Him. We know it because He is speaking it into our hearts. He says that truth sets us free. Satan works against this, but Satan has no power over us. The flesh is no help to us. In Christ, we have the truth.

This article started with the false consensus fallacy. The false consensus fallacy is a smokescreen fallacy. The smokescreen is put out to hide the fact that the original claim is just a bare claim. Even if there were a consensus on any claim, the consensus has no power to change reality. A consensus is often wrong. The only way we can avoid fallacies is to listen to Jesus Christ and yield our minds to Him.


Ungodly Thinking is Bankrupt

Ungodly thinking is bankrupt. It can have perfect logical form and yet the premises are either unproven or untrue. The premises are bare claims. They consist of made-up stuff. The amazing thing is when the ungodly thinker declares his or her made-up stuff to be real stuff. Then, based on this made-up stuff, the ungodly thinker makes claims that would require the ungodly thinker to be all-knowing. They claim to know that the godly thinker isn’t hearing clearly from Christ. They claim that divine revelation is ruled out. This is a gas-lighting fallacy. Then, the ungodly thinker refuses to check out the evidence–the evidence being Jesus Christ Himself. The ungodly thinker refuses to seek Christ. Everyone who seeks Christ finds Christ. Christ leads, teaches, and corrects every person who follows Him. It’s easy to check this out. The ungodly thinker refuses.

And yet, this is the expected behavior when a person repeatedly turns away from God. The ungodly thinker is an ungodly thinker because the ungodly thinker turned away from God when God revealed Himself to the ungodly thinker. When the ungodly thinker turned away from God, it was because the ungodly thinker loved evil rather than good. The ungodly thinker loved darkness rather than light. The ungodly thinker loved pleasure rather than God.

Some ungodly thinkers sink so low that they start trolling the Internet. They want to debate. They want someone to debate them, but they pull their facts out of nowhere. They play mind games. There is no reason to try to continue a conversation with such a person once you know that they’re totally in the dark. They don’t have a clue. They can’t discern good from evil or reality from make-believe.


We Are Learning

We are learning how to discern the voice of Christ’s Spirit and to yield to His will so that He can show us who we are in Him and transfigure us into that same image and likeness in our exact place in the body of Christ joined in unity to every other member.



False Gods

Denominations and doctrines can become gods that replace Jesus Christ. The human mind can become a god that replaces Jesus Christ. We must listen to Jesus Christ. He speaks through the Bible and every means mentioned in the Bible AND He never contradicts Himself. In other words, divine revelation never conflicts with the Bible. Human theology often conflicts with the Bible or explains away parts of the Bible.


Ad Ignorantiam Question Fallacy

This is an actual quote from Bill Nye.

You wouldn’t believe some of the things he said. Petros captured many quotes in these two books that you can have for free.


James Tour on Origin of Life

James Tour makes the following point:

Almost every chemical synthesis experiment in Origin of Life (OoL) research can be summed up by a protocol analogous to this:

  • Purchase some chemicals, generally in high purity, from a chemical company.
  • Mix those chemicals together in water in high concentrations or in a specific order under some set of carefully devised conditions in a modern laboratory.
  • Obtain a mixture of compounds that have a resemblance to one or more of the basic four classes of chemicals needed for life: carbohydrates, nucleic acids, amino acids, or lipids.
  • Publish a paper, making bold assertions about OoL from these functionless crude mixtures of sterochemically scrambled intermediates, much like Miller did in 1952.
  • Engage with the ever-gullible press to dial up the knob of unjustified extrapolation.
  • Watch the mesmerized layperson exclaim, “You see, scientists understand how life formed!”
  • Encourage a generation of science textbook writers to make colorful, deceptive cartoons of raw chemicals assembling into cells, which then emerge as slithering creatures from a prehistoric pond.

He states that every one of their experiments can be fit into this pattern.

He then notes that, while scientific knowledge has advanced tremendously since 1952, the origins of life science is still where it was in 1952.



It may seem strange to say this, but rational thought is impossible without divine revelation. Two types of arguments exist. In one type of argument, all parties are basing their reasoning on made-up stuff. The other type of argument is between made-up stuff and divine revelation. To come to any conclusion about any observation, experience, or concept, reasoning has to take place. If the conclusion goes beyond the observation or experience to explain it, then information has to be added to the premise. That information has to come from somewhere. It either comes from God in the form of divine revelation, from demons in the form of lies, or from the human mind in the form of made-up stuff. Find out more here:

Find out more in the book “Real Faith & Reason Journey” that you can download FREE Now.

How to Benefit from this Book

  1. Download and read the book.
  2. As you read, ask God to reveal the truth and to destroy any thoughts that conflict with truth. As you read, sincerely ask Him to give you a mind that’s open to Him and His truth.
  3. Act on what you learn. Exercise the faith of God by yielding your spirit, mind, and body to it.

What You’ll Get if You Read and Act on this Book

  1. You’ll know the difference between real faith and make-believe faith, and doubts will disappear.
  2. You’ll know the foundation of real reason and be able to spot fake, deceptive, unsound reason.
  3. You’ll experience peace of mind and inner confidence beyond what you thought possible.
  4. You’ll be able to give this same foundation of rational thought to others.
  5. The wisdom, understanding, knowledge, love, righteousness, holiness, and freedom of Christ will begin to flow through you in an ever-increasing stream.