Christians Don’t Need Fallacy

0002 AdIgnorantiamChristians never need to use fallacy. Never!

To prove any Atheistic or Evolutionistic position always requires fallacy. Always!

When Christians use ad ignorantiam fallacies, they weaken their testimony. That doesn’t mean that you can’t ask the question: “How do you know?” In fact, that’s a great question. What makes the evolutionist think that the observations support a claim that molecules once formulated themselves into a living cell somehow? What makes the evolutionists think that a first living cell morphed into people over long periods of time?

I’m not talking about possibility. I’m talking about proving that it actually happened. Stay away from the framing fallacy that implies, “If something is possible, then it’s OK to say that it’s true.” Think of yourself on trial for a murder that you didn’t commit. Would you be OK with it if the judge told the jury that the right attitude would be that if you could possibly have committed the crime, then you are guilty as charged?

When a Christian asks this type of question the purpose of the question is to show that the Atheist or Evolutionist is irrational in using his or her belief (or belief in non-belief) to fail to acknowledge God. The question only exposes the fact that something called “evidence” is actually dependent on an assumption. Lack of knowledge of an answer about something doesn’t disprove the thing. To imply that it does disprove a thing is irrational. It only shows that the thing is not proven. It exposes the fact that there is no real evidence for the thing.

Atheists or Evolutionists can’t use unanswered questions to disprove Divine revelation. They can use them to expose Christian speculation, however. And none of us want’s to be guilty of Christian speculation. Speculation adds to God’s Words or diminishes God’s Words–and if we do that, He will expose us as liars. That’s His promise to us. He does that for our own good. He doesn’t want us to love our own lies or the lies of others, since He has to judge those who love lies. He wants to cleanse us of our affection for our favorite lies.

Let me give an example. You say, “In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth.” “In six days God created the Heavens, Earth, seas, and everything in them.” There is no speculation here. This is all Divine revelation. So, a troll says, “How do you know?” You say, “God speaks this to me through Scripture.” Again, no speculation here–just revelation. The troll asks, “How do you know it’s God speaking to you through Scripture?” You answer, “I know because of person interaction with the Holy Spirit. He is the One Who tells me that the Bible is His Word without error. He also speaks to me whenever I read the Bible. He brings Scripture to my memory. While my spiritual senses are not fully developed yet, I’m learning to discern His Voice and to respond in submission. This very process brings spiritual maturity, and spiritual maturity brings discernment. So, while I don’t know all things, the Holy Spirit has plainly revealed these particular things to me.” The troll asks, “Well then, how exactly did God create everything instantly from nothing. Give me the science behind that. Huh? Huh?” You answer, “God hasn’t revealed that to me. However, He does reveal that He is the Almighty and that He is well capable.” At this point, the troll has nothing. For the troll to claim that you must know things that God hasn’t revealed or else God hasn’t revealed anything is irrational. The troll has nowhere to go without showing himself or herself to be irrational.


Ken Ham-Bill Nye Debate

0001 AppealToTradition

When Bill Nye debated Ken Ham about Creation (and, as it worked out, the favored story about no God, big bang, billions of years, no Flood, abiogenesis, amoeba to humans), Bill Nye wasn’t able to make any point to refute God or the Creation or to prove the favored story without relying on fallacy. In fact, every point Bill tried to make was riddled with multiple, nested fallacies.

Ken Ham, on the other hand, was falsely accused, by Evolutionists, of having the same problem. Some Christians came out against Ken Ham, noting how they would have been much more effective than he was. It’s easy to be critical, envious, or knit-picky. Looking at the transcript and analyzing the video for many hours will reveal that Ken’s fallacies weren’t on his main points. All of his main points hold up as rational, since they are based on his testimony of a personal relationship with Christ in which Christ reveals truth to Him, both through the Bible and through personal experience.

Bill Nye finally realized that he was comparing Divine revelation to assumption. Assumptions consist of made-up stuff. That’s their weakness. Made-up stuff is whatever someone makes up. Divine revelation comes from God Who knows all things and cannot lie.

The human mind has no internal method to tell the difference between made-up stuff and reality. This distinction can only be brought by the Almighty and loving God Who reveals it to us. He actually reveals this to every person, and every person receives partial revelation.

No one receives all that God is willing to give. No one rejects everything that God is willing to give. Some people acknowledge God and are thankful to Him. These have some knowledge of Truth and have a growing discernment between what God has revealed and what comes from other sources. With increasing spiritual maturity comes increasing discernment between good (what comes from God) and evil (what comes from human or demonic minds). Others, like Bill Nye, refuse to acknowledge God. They become increasingly unaware of the difference between reality and make-believe. Eventually, many of them become Atheists or functional Atheists. This is the reason for dogmatically held speculative doctrines in the Church and outside the Church.

Bill Nye ended up defending the use of assumptions as the foundation of all knowledge. Ken Ham ended up defending Divine revelation as the Foundation of all knowledge. Jesus Christ is the Foundation. No other Foundation can be laid that that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. In Him is hidden all knowledge. He is the Truth. He has become our wisdom, that is, righteousness, holiness, and redemption. In Him is hidden all knowledge. Everyone who’s on the side of Truth listens to Him.

The Book, “Reason,” uses this debate as a backdrop to discuss reason. The book isn’t about the debate, but the debate created a sharp distinction between reality and make-believe. “Reason,” hasn’t yet been released.


Compare God’s Story to the Secularistic Story


Stories are very powerful, but they can be true or false. When presented well, they can be very convincing. In a post-modern culture, presentation is everything. It’s all about winning. Winning is accomplished by convincing. Convincing is accomplished by presentation. The Secularistic presentations are paid for by tax dollars. God’s story is told plainly by very average people without Federal grant money. Yet, there is something called Truth. The Spirit of Truth lives in God’s Story. His Story begins with origins and goes to the completion. The Truth, even if it’s persecuted, is still Truth. A lie, even though funded by tax dollars, is still a lie.


The Basis of Creationism versus Evolutionism

The anti-Creation side asserts that the following assumptions are necessary for science, even claiming that not accepting these assumptions makes science or engineering impossible to do:A thought chain is as strong as it's weakest link. Add one assumption and you can prove anything.

  • the assumption that assumptions are necessary for scientific conclusions (the conclusions can be based on assumptions).
  • the assumption that we can use assumptions to establish knowledge
  • the assumption that there’s no difference between knowledge established by direct observation and knowledge established by arbitrary assumptions,made-up stories, plus direct observation so long as a majority of scientists accept the assumptions and stories
  • the assumption that anyone who won’t accept the anti-Bible assumptions can’t do science or engineering
  • the assumption that anti-Bible assumptions aren’t arbitrary like all other assumptions but are based on “experience”
  • the assumption that there’s no Creator God enforcing all the natural laws, but rather random chance–Naturalism, and the laws of nature just happen to be the way they are for no particular reason
  • the assumption that God didn’t create but everything just happened
  • the assumption that the big bang happened even though we don’t know how nothing could have caused everything
  • the assumption that God sent no worldwide, catastrophic Flood (the arbitrary assumption of Uniformitarianism as opposed to Catastrophism)
  • the assumption that the big-bang-billions-of-years-molecules-to-man story is science and to question it is unscientific
  • the assumption that all the thousands of other arbitrary assumptions and stories that are needed in order to keep big-bang-billions-of-years-molecules-to-man alive are valid and to be accepted as true without any evidence
  • the assumption that science will eventually find ways to explain how matter could have created itself, how information could be added to cells, how the first self-replicating life could have formed, where the laws of nature came from, and all the other unanswered questions (mysteries) that seem to indicate that the big-bang-billions-of-years-molecules-to-man story is just a lie

The Creation side asserts that the following revelation (which God speaks through the Bible and through personal experience with Jesus Christ) is the necessary for science, since not accepting this revelation results in science based on arbitrary assumptions:

  • the revelation that assumptions are arbitrary and not a valid basis for conclusions
  • the revelation that when we go beyond what can be observed or what God has revealed through Scripture, we ought not to be dogmatic
  • the revelation that God is the source of all the laws of science and the reason that we can know that those laws will be faithfully upheld
  • the revelation that God created the Heavens and the Earth and everything in them in six days
  • the revelation that mankind fell into sin, and having been given dominion over the Earth, brought Creation into the Fall
  • the revelation that the curse of death and sorrow is the natural consequence that followed from the Fall into sin
  • the revelation that God sent the worldwide, catastrophic Genesis Flood as the consequence of sin
  • the revelation that God caused the confusion of languages because of the rebellion of mankind
  • the revelation that mankind was, and is, not able to fulfill righteousness by obeying rules
  • that God came to Earth in the form of Jesus to save us by paying the price of sin and God’s plan to remove sin from anyone who will come to Him
  • the revelation that God will ultimately judge of every person according to His wisdom and holiness
  • the revelation that part of science is logic. If logic is used in a way that creates the illusion of being able to know something when the thing claimed isn’t really known, then logic is useless. It’s a fallacy. It’s a lie.

The Argument has Changed

science assumptions


The argument has now changed. The argument now is whether made-up stuff is real. Secondary argument is whether it’s rational for evolutionists to make up a story that says that Divine revelation is also made-up stuff. It comes down to a stand-off between dogmatism based on pure imagination versus ongoing experience by millions of people with the Creator of the Universe. This ongoing experience is empirical. Evolutionism is pure conceptual fabrication.


Made-up Stories versus Divine Revelation

In spite of the odds against Evolutionism, an Evolutionist is still able to make up stories that explain how everything we see now came into being without the Almighty God Who created all things. When it comes to the details, they can just say, “We don’t fully understand that yet, but science will show us how that happened.” The human mind can rationalize anything. Yet, God is real. Everyone who follows Christ knows that because they know Him.


Magical Thinking

There is certainly a lot of magical thinking that goes into the Big-Bang-Billions-of-Years-No-Flood-Molecules-to-Man story. Every so-called evidence is based on either made-up stories or else assumptions. The assumptions come out the the Big-Bang-Billions-of-Years-No-Flood-Molecules-to-Man worldview, making the entire thought process circular. Yet, we see Jesus. Hebrews 2:9 The Holy Spirit leads and teaches every follower of Christ moment by moment. One of the things the Holy Spirit teaches everyone who follows Christ is that the Bible is the Word of God without error and that He speaks through Scripture.


Irrational Evolutionism

To be an evolutionist, a person has to have a bias toward evolution. Rational thinking would eliminate it immediately. For kids in school, they have never learned critical thinking, except to be skeptical of God. There is a reason that this works. It ties two things together: a reward and the desires of the fleshly nature that’s enslaved to Satan. The only way anyone escapes this is by the power of grace for righteousness.


Which Theory of Origins is Correct?

Theories are stories. They are attempts to explain observations–to go beyond what is known. Whenever anyone goes beyond what is known, they are in a land of fantasy. Divine revelation is different from this. God has reveals that He created the Heavens, Earth, seas, and everything in them is six days ending with the creation of Adam from the dust on day six. He also reveals that there were about 6,000 years between Adam and today. Nothing that God reveals through His Creation (scientific observation) conflicts with that. God speaks through His Creation confirming what He is saying through Scripture. Going beyond what God is saying and going into fantasy land is sin. If anyone adds to God’s Words, whether it’s what He’s saying through Creation or the Bible, God will show that person to be a liar.