The truth
about salvation must not be as complicated as some theology professors have
imagined. Those who feel one must choose between a doctrinal view named after
one theologian or another may have a limited perspective. However, readers may
be better able to recognize the view closest to the truth by the humbleness of
the one delivering the message. A true disciple of Christ will not slander or
misjudge a fellow brother in Christ, but instead will seek to encourage and
build their brother up (James 4:10-11, 1 Thess. 5:11).[1] Pride is
most blinding, and those who choose to follow an arrogant man will be likewise
molded as such. Christ came in person and declared Himself to be the Truth
through which one can reach the Father (John 14:6-7). The enemy of truth seeks
to complicate the truth by making impressive use of three key logical
fallacies. These logical fallacies are taught to be avoided in mathematics. God
is the great mathematician who provided this knowledge so people must know
there is a right way and a wrong way to find the answer. Unfortunately, the
proudful professors in the universities and seminaries today are using an
appeal to emotions, appeal to ignorance, and appeal to popularity to mislead
those they were hired to educate. Upon recognizing people commonly have their worldview
formed by logical fallacies, one understands how the majority can be wrong,
even amongst the smartest of people.
Regardless of
how one feels about the truth, the majority are often wrong, for they have not
taken the initiative to conduct a proper investigation. An appeal to ignorance
is often used to shift the burden of proof and has proven successful at
manipulating millions, considering how Darwinism is still taught as scientific
truth in biology,[2] and the form
criticism method is still seen as relevant in biblical studies.[3] Appeal to ignorance is when one believes or disbelieves
in something while not considering possible evidence against their view. Perhaps
the conclusion one has reached resulted from insufficient research, resulting
in insufficient information. Whereas appeal to emotions is focused
on manipulating the emotions of another and disregards any evidence. One may
argue against a certain idea or worldview such as Christianity and in doing so
appeal to the emotions of the audience. People often express their view
beginning with “it just feels right to me,” or “it doesn’t feel right to me.” This
fallacy results in self-centered people who care more about their wants than
caring for the truth. For those
desperate for acceptance, truth becomes a secondary issue, if even considered
at all, for people tend to gather around those who shout the loudest. Hence,
appeal to popularity is believing if the majority supports a view, it must be true. People
may want to accept what the majority believes out of fear of being treated as
an outcast. Companies make use of this deception to sell their products with clever
marketing through the media. Social and political figures win the approval of
others by claiming to support whatever belief or idea is trending. Sadly, appeal
to popularity is commonly used to indoctrinate young minds. One must recognize and confess to being guilty of not thinking
properly, before one can begin to discover what is true. Readers must realize
even the most knowledgeable people can be the most wrong.[4]
[1]
In, The Potters Freedom: A Defense of
the Reformation and the Rebuttal of Norman Geisler’s Chosen but Free by
James White readers should look out for how many times the author edifies His
fellow brother in Christ, Norman Geisler.
[2]
The founders of the supposed Lucy ancestor confessed
to being biased and admitted this ape should not be in our family tree; Donald
C. Johanson, and Maitland A. Edey, Lucy: The Beginnings of Humankind, (New
York: NY, Simon & Schuster, 1981),
257-258. The insistence of atheistic evolution being true is not based on solid
observable evidence, and even if some form of naturalistic evolution is true
theology and science are not in conflict. A growing number of theologians,
apologists and secular scientists alike have recently united to offer their
mutual support for the hypothesis presented by Doctor S. Joshua Swamidass in
his book titled The Genealogical Adam and Eve: The Surprising Science of
Universal Ancestry. In this book Swamidass presents a logical, scientific,
and biblically supported argument unifying evolutionary causes for creation
with the biblical account; S. Joshua Swamidass, The
Genealogical Adam and Eve: The Surprising Science of Universal Ancestry,
(Downers Grove: IL, IVP Academic, 2019), 174-178. The belief in random mutations accounting for the existence of complex
living organisms has been scientifically proven false. Because of
advanced methods used in laboratories today, one can examine molecular life and
find clear evidence against atheistic evolution. Regarding the recent
discoveries in science, micro-biologist Michael Behe writes, “…one higher
category cannot descend from another by means of an unplanned process such
as Darwin’s mechanism,” thus, “Random mutation and natural selection cannot
build a brain or even coherently modify one.”; Michael Behe, Darwin Devolves,
(Broadway, NY: HarperOne, 2019), 157, 282. Macro-evolution does not happen, devolution happens, as
observed with all the different dog breeds. The cute fluffy dog is not as
exceptional as the wolf, and certainly not as smart. The uncomfortable truth is
Adam and Eve may have been two rather hairy and likely short human beings, but
these two were human, and were certainly smarter than the average human living
today. If the similarity between a chimp and human were a remaining obstacle
one must accept DNA similarities is not evidence in support of atheistic evolution
and is certainly not evidence against God. When examining DNA people are trying
to understand complex information designed by the most advanced mind. One
should simply humbly accept DNA is evidence for God, and
the human mind can comprehend this much to be true. The discovery of DNA is
so amazing the faithful Darwinist who rejects intelligent design is guilty of
trying to make this conflicting truth support their presupposed view. This is
like a stubborn child trying to fit a square into the circle space on a shape
sorter toy. Moreland addresses the obvious elephant in a room filled with
scientists who reject God, stating “Indeed, the amount of information in the
genetic code of a human being is more than all the information in all the books
in the Library of Congress combined!”; J.P., Moreland, Love the Lord Your God with all Your Mind,
(Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 2012). Information
must come from an intelligent mind, so it just seems absurd to argue for
atheistic evolution being true starting with supposed DNA evidence. The honest atheist is in an awkward place when having to
accept a person is 90% related to a cat, 99% percent related to a mouse, and
70% related to the chimp; Jefferey P. Tomkins,
“Comprehensive Analysis of Chimpanzee and Human Chromosomes Reveals Average DNA
Similarity of 70%,” (Answers Research Journal 6, 2013), 64; Joan U.
Pontius, James C. Mullikin, Douglas R. Smith, Agencourt Sequencing Team,
Kerstin Lindblad-Toh, Sante Gnerre, Michele Clamp et al, "Initial sequence
and comparative analysis of the cat genome," Genome research 17,
no. 11 (2007), 1678-1680; Chris Gunter, and Ritu Dhand, “Human Biology by
Proxy,” Nature 420, no. 6915 (2002), 509; J. Cohen, “EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY: Relative Differences: The
Myth of 1%,” (Science 316, no. 5833, June 7, 2007), 1836; Tom
Wolfe, The Kingdom of Speech, (New York, NY: Little, Brown and Company,
2016).
[3]
Form Criticism slipped in during a time
when there were few scholars caring to work in New Testament scholarship,
perhaps the lie of Darwinism was a contributing factor. A few sceptics took
advantage of this opportunity, one key figure being Rudolf Bultmann, and they exercised
a dominance in the field of biblical study during this time in history. Form
Criticism is insistent that none of the key eyewitnesses to Christ life, death,
and resurrection helped in the forming of the New Testament cannon. Despite contrary
evidence, this view teaches on how the NT canon was formed by followers of a
Jesus they never met, to present ideas considered useful for encouraging their
community. For more details on the history this method rooted in logically
fallacious reasoning read, Darrell, L. Bock, Studying the Historical Jesus:
A Guide to Sources and Methods, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002),
182-185. For all the evidence against this logically fallacious idea, developed
by sceptics with the sole purpose of misinforming students, please read the
following; Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as
Eyewitness Testimony (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2006), Chapter 21 “The End of
Form Criticism (Confirmed),” 590-615; Andreas J. Kostenberger, Darrell L. Bock,
Josh D. Chatraw, Truth in a Culture of Doubt, (Nashville TN: B&H
Publishing, 2009); Darrell L. Bock, Studying the Historical Jesus, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing, 2002);
Bauckham, Richard. Jesus and the God of Israel. Grand Rapids, MI:
William B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 2009); M.F. Bird, The Gospel of the
Lord: How the Early Church Wrote the Story of Jesus, (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 2014), 113-24; J. Warner, Wallace, Cold-Case Christianity: A
Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels, (Colorado, CO:
David C. Cook, 2013), 112, 175, 250-252.
[4]
An example in recent history which proved
how easily large groups of people can be fooled was during the O.J. Simpson
trial. All the evidence showed O.J. Simpson was the murderer. The defense
lawyers appealed to each of these logical fallacies and proved large groups of
people can be easily manipulated. A trial for the murder of two innocent people
became focused on racism and corrupt police officers. The defense lawyers
successfully convinced the jury and thousands, perhaps millions of viewers,
racism was the true reason Simpson was being accused of murder. The jury found
Simpson innocent of all charges and multitudes cheered when the verdict was
given. The simple truth is people are easily influenced and quick to believe
misinformation presented by authoritative figures. Even the renowned scholar
and sceptic Bart D. Ehrman was troubled to learn the majority living in Sweden
were educated to believe Jesus was never real, seeing Him to be a fabricated
character like the Easter bunny; Bart D. Ehrman, Jesus
Interrupted, (New York, NY: HarperOne, 2009), 139-140. The clear lesson
from history is all people are vulnerable to being fooled, especially in large
numbers, as evidenced in Nazi Germany during WWII, or observed during the O.J.
Simpson trial. An entire nation can be fooled into believing a lie.
0 comments:
Post a Comment