(quote from RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf)

The premise is the proof. And yet, we must prove the premise to ourselves. How do we prove a premise? We certainly can’t use another unproven premise. What good would another unproven premise do? And we can’t just declare made-up stuff to be an axiom since applying the label “axiom” has no power to make the made-up stuff true. But if we can’t prove a premise is true, the premise is unknown. And we can’t use the unknown to prove anything. Without true premises, we can’t know anything at all. However, we’ve already identified a way we can know reality with certainty. This way is divine revelation through Jesus Christ. He is the truth, and all knowledge and wisdom are hidden in Him. We can listen to the voice of the Absolute God.

(end quote)

(quote from RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf)

Assumed Premises versus True Premises

Let’s get back to the basics of logic. Rational thought must have true premises. We must prove the premises. We need a reason to believe the premises. The reason must be rational. It must be absolute. We need to know the premises are absolute and true.

To illustrate, suppose I insist I know the Bible is God’s word based on sound reasoning. Then I say my premise (proof) is I assume it, and I take my assumption as an axiom. I presuppose my axiom.

My assumed axiom: “I assume the Bible is God’s word.”

So the ungodly thinker insists the Bible isn’t God’s word and also says she bases her claim on sound reasoning. And the ungodly thinker takes the following assumption as an axiom.

The ungodly thinker’s assumed axiom: “I assume the Bible isn’t God’s word.”

Why is my assumption better than the ungodly thinker’s assumption if I can’t even prove it to myself? Since assumptions are made up, they aren’t part of reality. How can made-up stuff prove something else is real?

I insist on the following:

It makes sense to interpret scientific observations based on the Bible.

It makes sense to interpret historical artifacts based on the Bible.

My interpretation of scientific observations proves the Bible’s authority.

My interpretation of historical artifacts proves the Bible’s authority.

I can trace my premises back to my original assumption of the Bible’s authenticity.

The ungodly thinker insists on the following:

It makes sense to interpret scientific observations based on the writings of ungodly people.

It makes sense to interpret historical artifacts based on the writings of ungodly people.

Her interpretation of scientific observations disproves the Bible’s authority.

Her interpretation of historical artifacts disproves the Bible’s authority.

The ungodly thinker can trace her premises back to her original assumption of the Bible’s unreliability.

The premise is the proof. And yet, we must prove the premise to ourselves. How do we prove a premise? Of course, we certainly can’t use another unproven premise. What good would another unproven premise do? And we can’t just declare made-up stuff to be an axiom since applying the label “axiom” has no power to make the made-up stuff true. But if we can’t prove a premise is true, the premise is unknown. And we can’t use the unknown to prove anything. Without a true premise, we can’t know anything at all. However, we’ve already identified a way we can know reality with certainty. This way is divine revelation through Jesus Christ.

The ungodly thinker can claim you aren’t experiencing what you’re experiencing. The ungodly thinker can refuse to look at the evidence. (The evidence is that anyone who sincerely continues to seek Christ will find Christ. When they find Christ, they will know.) If you say you assume, you have just claimed the ungodly thinkers made-up stuff is competing with your made-up stuff. You had a solid reason to believe, but you gave it up. By assuming the Bible is God’s word, you secretly accept the atheist presupposition that God doesn’t reveal anything to anyone.

(end quote)

(quote from RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf)

Manipulators know how to manipulate. They’re good at it. That’s why advertisers pay millions for a thirty-second advertisement on national TV. Watch this hidden-camera YouTube video. It shows how easily people conform.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEhSk71gUCQ

We can, however, choose our leader. We can choose who we’ll follow. We can follow Christ on the one hand. On the other hand, we can follow fallen human minds or demonic entities.

“Conformity is the jailer of freedom and the enemy of growth” ~ John F. Kennedy

(end quote)

(quote from RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf)

We’ve learned that differing worldviews are a major cause of disagreements between people. That’s because worldviews are fake-realities. Fake-realities seem more real than real reality, and the parts of reality that don’t fit our worldviews seem insane and unreal. For instance, worldviews account for different interpretations of the same Scripture by sincere Christians. In the same way, worldviews account for different interpretations of scientific observations by sincere scientists. And confirmation bias mixed with peer pressure makes group-held worldviews more powerful than individual worldviews. It’s easy to see why group-held worldviews control various groups of politicians, theologians, and scientists who use peer pressure to assure compliance and censorship.

And the children go to summer camp,

And then to the university,

And they all get put in boxes,

And they all come out the same. ~ Pete Seeger

(end quote)

How did we get here? How much has Satan distorted our ability to think? Our hope is in Jesus. He is renewing our minds step by step.

(quote from RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf)

Though people with similar worldviews attract each other, every thinker has his or her own unique worldview. We subconsciously manufactured worldviews as concepts of all reality. We then subconsciously filtered our experiences and observations to match our worldviews. In other words, we each used our own unique worldview concept as a filter to sift out any parts of reality that didn’t fit into our particular worldviews.

(end quote)

(quote from RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf)

The more an assumption agrees with our inner biases, the more dogmatically we believe the assumption. Therefore, we still believe some assumptions even though they’re in disagreement with our observations or experiences. We cling to them despite the obvious conflict.

(end quote)

God is real and reveals Himself to every person. Some people are in denial. God explains why they refuse to come to the Light and why they love darkness.

Ungodly thinkers can’t face the fact that their thoughts aren’t based on anything except fallacies. It’s difficult for them to see it. Those who follow Christ have gone through that same revelation where we realized our dependency on Christ, so we can relate. No one has anything they haven’t received. No one can gloat.

(quote from RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf)

In Real Faith & Reason Volume One in Trip 3, The Problem of Worldviews, we thoroughly covered the real source of assumptions and showed that they come out of worldviews. And we’ve seen how we formed these worldviews by believing our interpretations of previous experiences and observations. The experiences and observations themselves didn’t form our worldviews. Our interpretations of our experiences and observations formed the worldviews. And since our worldviews filtered and altered our interpretations, we created our worldviews by circular reasoning fallacies and confirmation bias.

(end quote)

We are all affected by the great false prophet system of media and education. This complex system constantly bombards us with naturalism, materialism, humanism, and rationalism. Rationalism is the belief that the human mind can dream up truth without the benefit of either observation or divine revelation. These philosophies brought the great destruction of the French Revolution. And yet, people forget. What we hear repeatedly from many seemingly independent voices begins to sound “true” when it’s a lie.

(quote from RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf)

When we associate assumptions with facts, they more easily deceive us. When we try to guess beyond facts, we think assumptions come out of the facts. However, they don’t come out of the facts. Instead, they float over the facts.

(end quote)

Notice the difference between assumptions and divine revelation.

(quote from RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf)

Even though we can’t base assumptions on previous experiences directly, we assume carefully. Our assumptions don’t conflict with something real in a way that’s obvious. Not usually. Our assumptions conform to what anyone can easily check. Here’s the problem. Assumptions also conform to worldviews. And worldviews seem real. Hardened worldviews even seem more real than what we can easily observe. These are Satan’s strongholds in our minds.

Therefore, we must concede that people don’t always assume in a vacuum or in a way we can easily prove false. However, just because we make assumptions that don’t conflict with observations, Scripture, or experiences in an obvious way, that doesn’t mean the assumptions have somehow become true.

(end quote)

What God says is true. Assumptions consist of made-up stuff. When someone says the Big Bang Cosmology is fact, it’s OK to see if other cosmologies explain the observations as well or better. Those other cosmologies that work better expose the dogmatism of false science that insists on the Big Bang Cosmology. The danger is in thinking any cosmology is based on more than vapor. None of them can be proven. We can only prove they don’t conflict with what we observe or what God reveals. They are all laden with assumptions. There’s a vast gulf between assumptions and reality.

(quote from RealReality.org/Real_Faith_and_Reason_Vol_2_-_Scientia.pdf)

More Complex than Assumption Based On Experience

Based on what we’ve just seen, we realize what’s happening here is more complex than just assumptions based on previous experiences. Bill Nye thinks his assumptions aren’t arbitrary, but all assumptions are arbitrary. He bases these assumptions on his arbitrary worldview. Why are worldviews arbitrary? All worldviews go beyond experience, observation, and divine revelation. Powerful social forces press for conformity in assumptions. This coercion from peer pressure makes Bill’s assumptions even more deceptive. Those pressing for conformity shun, exclude, or punish those who don’t conform. Those in control find ways to hurt anyone who doesn’t conform. Those who don’t conform lose money and opportunity. Then the fallacy of groupthink enters. It gives the illusion the assumptions have substance.

(end quote)