Revelational Apologetics

0001 PresuppVRev3

Both presuppositional and Revelational apologetics use physical observation and experience/experiment. Evidential apologetics seems to focus mainly on physical observation and experience/experiment that is interpreted via assumptions. Presuppositional apologetics generally recognized Divine revelation as one of many sources of truth, but it puts puts special emphasis on presuppositions as the basis for thinking, while revelational apologetics puts special emphasis on Divine revelation through the Holy Spirit, our Teacher and Counselor sent through Christ, as the basis for thinking.

“Evidential apologetics or evidentialism is an approach to Christian apologetics emphasizing the use of evidence to demonstrate that God exists. The evidence is supposed to be evidence both the believer and nonbeliever share, that is to say one need not presuppose God’s existence.” Wikipedia

“Presuppositionalism is a school of Christian apologetics that believes the Christian faith is the only basis for rational thought. It presupposes that the Bible is divine revelation and attempts to expose flaws in other worldviews.” Wikipedia

I’m careful about what Wikipedia says, since they have such an anti-God influence, but I’ve included these definitions from that site.

“Evidential Apologetics is that style of Christian defense that stresses the miracles found in the Bible, particularly Christ’s resurrection as an evidence for the existence of God and the validity of Christ and His words. It also uses historical evidences to support the veracity of the Biblical account(s). In this, it is very similar to Classical Apologetics, which stresses reason in its approach to evidences.”  Matt Slick of CARM, https://carm.org/evidential-apologetics

“This form of Christian apologetics deals with presuppositions.1 A Christian presuppositionalist presupposes God’s existence and argues from that perspective to show the validity of Christian theism.2 This position also presupposes the truth of the Christian Scriptures and relies on the validity and power of the gospel to change lives (Rom. 1:16).” Matt Slick of CARM, https://carm.org/presuppositional-apologetics

Comparing evidential apologetics to revelational apologetics, evidential apologetics exposes the mechanics of the lies. Revelational apologetics exposes the structure of the lies. Evidential apologetics is helpful to expose the lies about what has been observed. Revelational apologetics exposes that fact that nothing can be known without Divine revelation. Without Christ, nothing can be known. In Him is hidden all knowledge. In Him is hidden all knowledge.

You may wonder if revelational apologetics is the answer that will cause all bad doctrine to cease. Eventually, God will reveal the fallacies of all the lies that have been told, but don’t expect someone who dearly wants to believe in evolutionism or Atheism to be rational. There are many ways to get out of being rational. They’re called fallacies, tricks, and games.

Here is some further reading:

Revelational Apologetics Versus Presuppositional Apologetics

Extrabiblical Revelation, Interpreting Scripture Through Assumptions, and Adding to the Canon of Scripture

A Conversation Using Revelational Apologetics with a Theistic Evolutionist

A Conversation with a Presuppositional Apologist

Equivocation of Assumptions at Berkeley

Assumptions

Worldviews

Divine Revelation

Warnings About Divine Revelation

Skeptical Arguments Against Divine Revelation

What Brings Regeneration?

00001 PresuppVRev22

 

 

 

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Can Evidence Based on Assumption be Taken Seriously?

0001AssumptionWeakestLink1

In science, theology, politics, and interpersonal communications, it’s difficult to tell the difference between reality and make-believe. We observe things, but not directly. We filter our observations through our own worldviews. Worldviews are powerful filters that don’t allow us to observe what doesn’t already fit into the worldview. Group-held worldviews are even more powerful, since they provide the group-think confirmation bias that creates an even stronger illusion . . . that our worldviews are reality itself rather than an just inner concept of what we think reality is.

Look at the Theory of Evolution as an example. When you actually look at the so-called “evidence,” every evidence is based on assumptions. Assumptions consist of made-up stuff that generally has been formulated to conform to the existing worldviews. The worldview is merely a fake reality masquerading as real reality. If you allow yourself even a single assumption, you can prove anything to yourself.

Let me give an example. Allow me one assumption. I will assume that you don’t exist. That’s now a given. Since you don’t exist, you don’t exist. That didn’t take any heavy lifting, did it? I just proved that you don’t exist based on my assumption.

Of course, that wouldn’t fool anyone. You need many more fallacies to cover up the fact that I’m making the whole thing up. So, how do I do that. Add more stories and complexity to the idea using the hundreds of available fallacies, and I could develop a story about your non-existence that’s as funny as the big bang, billions of years, no Flood, life from non-life, amoeba to human, no need for God story.

Here, we have a situation where every person who follows Christ knows Christ and is led and taught by the Holy Spirit moment by moment. As you know that you exist because of your experience of being you, everyone who follows Christ knows God exists because of his or her experience of being led and taught by the Holy Spirit. That’s not to say that we’re always faithful in listening, acknowledging, submitting, or allowing Him to think His thoughts, speak His Words, or do His acts through us. It just means we’re familiar with Him to some extent. To the extent that we have yielded to Him, we have discernment between that which comes from Him and that which comes from other sources. Many times, we do lean on our own understanding rather than acknowledging Him. Hence, you can witness the many doctrinal and denominational divisions in the Church. Yet, Jesus Christ is real, and He is the reality of the ongoing experience of every single person who follows Him.

For a Secularist (skeptic, Atheist, Agnostic, Humanist, etc.) to claim that a follower of Christ isn’t experiencing what he or she is experiencing is as bizarre as me claiming that you don’t exist. The Secularist has only one tool to develop such a thought: making stuff up and then confusing the issue with smokescreen fallacies.

Yet, when confronted with the fact that you know Jesus Christ personally, Secularists commonly will begin to use the fallacy of faulty comparison. There are several types of faulty comparison fallacies. This one is false equivalence of two opposites. It’s very helpful to the Secularist in this situation, since the Secularist is faced with a stark contrast between Divine revelation and making stuff up. The Secularist isn’t comfortable with the fact that every single thing he or she thinks he or she knows is based on made-up stuff. So, in this case, Secularists intuitively reach for a tu quo que (you too) fallacy. They want to say, “You too have the same problem.” Of course, tu quo que doesn’t solve the Secularist’s problem. It merely is a way to project their problem onto you. In effect, they’re saying, you’re situation is just as bad as mine. There are many problems with this kind of thinking. Most importantly, you don’t have the same problem the Secularist has. Yet, if you don’t stay in the Presence of Jesus, if you try to lean on your own mind rather than His Mind, you will become confused by these tactics.

To use tu quo que, the Secularist must use a faulty comparison fallacy first. Therefore, the Secularist will try to lump Divine revelation in as part of the made-up stuff. He or she must claim that Divine revelation is also made-up stuff. This asserts the following universal negative: “God doesn’t reveal anything to anyone.” This, of course, is based on that bare assertion and universal negative, “There is no God.”

When the lumping fallacy fails, the Secularist may turn to other ways to equate Divine revelation with making stuff up. He or she may claim that you can’t know it’s God speaking to you, and, if Divine revelation depended on human ability, that would be true. However, Divine revelation is, as the term implies, dependent on God. He is able. What would possibly prevent the Almighty God from being able to reveal Himself and His Truth to a willing human heart? Another common Secularist tactic is to claim that the human mind must interpret the revelation, and the revelation is, therefore, subject to human interpretation. That’s a statement contrary to fact. God’s revelation is pure. Human interpretation adds to it or diminishes it. That’s why God commands us not to add to His Utterances or diminish them. Divine revelation plus human interpretation equals human ideas. We must leave the things God hasn’t revealed with God and receive the revelation He has given. Then the Secularist is likely to remind you that your own mind can fool you, and this is true. However, that’s not a problem to God as long as we remain humble. It’s a very good reason for us to hold our theology loosely, but it’s not a good reason to stop seeking God or to follow the Secularist’s delusion. The Holy Spirit is constantly leading us. As we yield. our spiritual senses are exercised, which brings maturity and discernment between good (what God is saying) and evil (what comes from human or demonic minds). The Holy Spirit is given to lead us into all Truth. Just keep following Him, and be ready to abandon your own convictions and many things you’ve been taught in favor of Divine revelation.

The big problem that the Secularist has with all his or her claims is that Secularist’s claims are based on made-up stuff. It’s irrational to make stuff up and call it real. Their claims to deny Divine revelation are based on made-up stuff. Your testimony of Divine revelation is based on Divine revelation. It always comes down to Divine revelation versus made-up stuff.

If the Secularist is successful in convincing himself or herself using these arguments, the Secularist loses the ability to know the difference between reality and make-believe in this regard. It’s no longer a game. It’s insanity. Secularists have lost touch with reality.

The big bang, billions of years, no Flood, life from non-life, amoeba to human, no need for God story is a complex story based on fallacies. The hundreds of fallacies can be classified into two groups, and only one of those groups is functional. The functional fallacy is always some form of making stuff up and calling it true. It could be an outright lie. It could be a hidden assumption. It could be an “axiom of science.” There are many ways to make stuff up.

All other fallacies are smokescreens to give the illusion that the made-up stuff isn’t made-up stuff. Those smokescreens include appeal to ridicule, which has become very popular. There are many ways to ridicule. Appeal to offence is becoming very popular: “I’m offended; therefore, you are wrong and I am right.” Appeal to anger works the same way.

Then, there are the many statistical fallacies: “It’s very unlikely that God exists.” Really? What is the number you can put on that probability, and how do you derive it? How do you know that you have taken every factor into account? What are the steps to your scientific experiment you use to determine that every follower of Christ is not experiencing what he or she is experiencing?

Bill Nye debated Ken Ham. He suddenly realized that he had to defend the use of assumption. He claimed that assumptions come out of experience. Another word for experience is experiment. One of the ways we observe in science is through experience/experiment. These experiences are repeatable, so many people can observe the same thing. Assumptions don’t come out of experiments. They’re used to interpret the observations made when performing an experiment. Interpretation always adds to what has been observed or diminishes it. These assumptions are developed to conform to the existing worldview, in most cased, the group-think of the ruling shared worldview of the scientific community.

Of course, the same thing happens in Christian denominations. It happens in politics. Is there any hope for humanity?

Yes. Jesus Christ came to set us free. In fact, He said that the Truth will set us free. He is the Truth. God knows all things. He reveals some things to us. For instance, He reveals Himself through the things He has created to every person. Those who acknowledge Him and thank Him receive further revelation and faith, that is, certainty of reality, comes to them. Those who refuse to acknowledge Him lose the ability to tell the difference between what human minds are making up and what is coming from God.

When we believe what God is telling us about Jesus Christ and how He died to pay the price of our own sins, how He rose again from the dead having overcome sin, and how He now offers us forgiveness and a path to freedom from our fallen state, we are changed. We are born into the family of God, when we had previously been slaves to Satan. At that point, we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit to be our Teacher and Leader. If we seek Him and His Will, then, we continue to learn and be changed. One of the first things that He teaches us is that the Bible is His Word without error, and that He speaks to us through the Bible. He teaches us that there are many gifts that come through the Spirit, that the gifts, ministries, offices, and orders that He reveals through Scripture are important to Him and that He will eventually reveal how all of them work for us and are part of our salvation.

As we walk with the Spirit and keep step with the Spirit, we don’t stay in the same place. What we thought we understood yesterday soon becomes quite shallow compared to the new, unfolding, revelation of today. Tomorrow, there will be more as we progress in the Spirit. God has built many safeguards into the Church to keep this unfolding revelation on track. Every human-developed method that isn’t in Scripture creates a danger of going off course. As we yield to the Spirit, our spiritual senses are exercised by reason of use to discern between good (what comes from God) and evil (what comes from other sources).

We don’t need to boast of our spirituality. In fact, such boasting is a sure sign of spiritual immaturity. God has provided no way by which we can truly measure our maturity in Christ. We can tell a bit about our spiritual immaturity every time we exhibit some form of the fruit of the flesh: thoughts, words, or acts of sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions, and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. Every time we find ourselves irritated or striving for something, we realize that we need more of Him.

The way forward is glorious for those who don’t get distracted. There are higher heights and deeper depths in Christ. Keep on keeping on.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

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.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

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.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail