Ten Widely-believed Fallacies Today

Ten Widely-believed Fallacies Today

by Christopher Andrus

August 30, 2013


  1. Every reasonable person knows the God described in the Bible can’t exist.
  2. There is no evidence that the Biblical God exists.
  3. All claims of immaterial existence are ridiculous because they can’t be      demonstrated scientifically.  So belief in the Biblical God is akin to belief in Santa Claus or the “flying spaghetti monster”.
  4. Because Science has been proven to be the only reliable way to understand the physical world, then this world must be all that exists.
  5. Biblical Christianity is anti-Science and anti-Reason.
  6. We can know what happened in the past and what will happen in the future based on what we understand about how nature works now.
  7. I am not religious because my beliefs are all scientifically-based.
  8. It is always wrong to judge others.
  9. There is no such thing as absolute truth.
  10.  Every reasonable person knows that the Bible is filled with scientific impossibilities, evil teachings or actions done by or required by God and other errors.

Introductory note: Because of the importance of these issues for every one of us it is not rational either to ignore or dismiss the arguments which follow.  They must either be refuted with rational arguments or accepted.  We assert that only the Christian worldview can account for all we experience and know.

  1. Every reasonable person knows the God described in the Bible can’t exist.

Why this is a fallacy:

It is impossible to know that God doesn’t exist because proving the non-existence of God would require complete knowledge of the universe, and not just in the present, but also from the beginning.  Of course, this is impossible for any human being.  So, one may doubt that God exists.  But you cannot know that He doesn’t.  However, the reality is that everyone actually knows that the Biblical God does exist, but most suppress this knowledge.

This is because human beings are made in the image of our Creator God and for the purpose of having a relationship with Him.  But we have also been born with a natural tendency to run away from God, which we inherited from our ancestors, going all the way back to our First Parents, Adam and Eve.  Because of this sinful nature, we have the desire to get along without our Creator and to try to make sense of the world without Him.  This is the driving force behind all philosophies and religions other than Biblical Christianity.  (The use of the pronoun “Him” for God does not mean that God is male.  God created both the male and female genders.  However, the New Testament message is that God became a man in the person of Jesus of Nazareth.)

Modern public education is based on the false premise that The God of the Bible doesn’t exist.  So, from our very first days in school we are taught about a world in which God is irrelevant.  One is free to believe in God personally, but only if this belief has no impact on one’s life and understanding of the universe.  In other words, God is only acceptable if He is irrelevant and powerless.

But, The Almighty Creator God cannot be dismissed.  Because of Who He Is, we must begin learning by learning about Him.  If we don’t, we have actually rejected Him and replaced Him with something else.  The Bible calls this idolatry.  In the past idolatry was obvious, being seen in open worship of other gods or ideals.  But the most common form of idolatry in the 21st century is more subtle.  Today’s main idols are human reason and desires and Science as the only source of knowledge.

Because God is The One Who gave every one of us life and everything else and Who sustains us moment-by-moment, we are “biting The Hand that feeds us” if we do not make our relationship with Him our top priority.  Again, you cannot plead ignorance on this.  You already know in your heart that you are completely dependent on God every single moment of your life.  He calls you to forsake your false sense of independence and your futile resistance to Him.

  1. There is no evidence that the Biblical God exists.

There is plenty of evidence and arguments which show that belief in God is far more reasonable than believing that He doesn’t exist or, even, doubting that He does.  In a court of law, evidence will be sought and viewed differently by the prosecution and the defense.  Such is also the case between those believe in God’s existence and those who assume that God doesn’t exist.

The first piece of evidence for God’s existence is the existence of human minds.  The most common belief today (which is falsely called “scientific”) is that the universe really consists only of matter/energy and mindless forces of nature in time.  But if this is true then the universe is ultimately mindless.  But then where did human minds come from?

Saying that our minds and identity are only brain chemistry and that we only imagine otherwise won’t work.  This is because, even if we are deluded about ourselves, “we” still exist as subjects of the delusion.  In other words, “you” and “I” exist both as objects and subjects.  We are not our brains.  Rather, you and I have bodies (including our brains), but we are clearly more than this.  For example, if a person is viewing their own brain-scan he or she must be distinguished from what is being viewed.  It is not brain chemistry viewing itself!

The Biblical view explains why we have minds – because we have been made in the image of our Creator as rational and moral beings.  And it is also explains why we have bodies, and also why there is a physical world (which the alternative view cannot) – because God created the universe and created us as minds/souls/spirits housed in physical bodies.

The next evidence of God’s existence is the existence of logic and morality.  Both of these are not part of the material world, so they cannot be explained if matter is all that exists.  Logic simply isn’t observed in Nature.  Rather, it must be assumed and relied upon before we can study and learn about Nature or anything else and before we can communicate with others, and, even, before we can think at all.  In other words, logic is a characteristic of our minds.

In this also we are like God.  God, Who is The Original Mind, is the Creator of our minds.  And our minds also reflect how His works.  God is perfectly logical because true logic describes how His mind works and how ours should work.  As such, God is not under rules of Logic which are higher than Him.  Nor is He logical because He arbitrarily defines what is logical.

In the same way, although we do make moral judgments about things which we observe in the material world, morality in itself cannot be observed in the material world.  It is also important to recognize that we tend to make such judgments only on actions done by people, not by animals.  This is quite revealing in itself in pointing to the uniqueness of humanity as rational moral beings.

Morality, like logic, exists in our minds.  Again, this reflects our Creator.  And, as with logic, true morality describes what God is like as The Original Person.  More accurately, it is The Original Three Persons, Who are equally-divine.  This is important because without this plurality God could not be relational and, thus, moral within His own Being.  This is why Christian Theism is superior to other monotheistic theologies (most significantly, that of Islam and Judaism, but also that of Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses and other monistic faiths).  All polytheistic theologies (with multiple, clearly distinct deities) are clearly inferior because God must be The Supreme Being, otherwise He is not Worthy of The Name.  So, it is necessary that God be One Supreme Being but in more than One Person.

Morality describes how The Three Persons of God have always related to each other and how we, as beings made in God’s image, should relate to each other, as well as to our world and to God.  This is also why there is an impressive amount of agreement on what is right and wrong around the world and also throughout history.  Of course, there is also a considerable amount of disagreement.  But this can be explained as the result of mankind’s natural tendency to reject both God and His moral ways.

As is the case with logic, God is not under rules of morality, nor is He moral because everything He does is moral by definition.  The latter would make morality arbitrary.  But morality is both divinely-based and real (not arbitrary) because God is Three Real Personal Beings Who are also perfectly Good.  Of course, in the latter respect, we are not like Him.

The next piece of evidence that there is a divine Mind behind the universe is the fact that we find both order and disorder in the universe.  On our level, it is clear that purposeful human activity is constantly required to create order and prevent increasing disorder.  Anyone who never cleans their house or brushes their teeth easily finds this to be true!  This is also true of human societies.

But, if this is so in our experience, then it is questionable at best to assume that purposeful activity wasn’t required in order to produce the amazing order which we observe both in the physical universe itself and, especially, in living things.  Today, we are constantly learning more and more about how complex even the simplest living things are.  Furthermore, this complexity involves countless parts working in harmony so that if even one of them is missing or defective the organ or organism cannot function.  (This is known as “irreducible complexity”.)  It is simply an extreme act of blind faith to believe that this developed without a Mind and design behind it.  We know that it takes a watchmaker to make a watch.  It took a far greater Mind to create the universe which includes watches, living things and everything else.

So, the problem is not a lack of evidence.  Rather, it is that most people don’t want to look at the evidence as pointing to God, but, rather, are completely committed to trying to make sense of everything without God.  The claim that there is no evidence for the God of the Bible is simply a lie.  The most that anyone can claim is a belief that the evidence more reasonably points to the non-existence of God.  But we assert the contrary.

Furthermore, it is absolutely absurd for anyone to demand that an Almighty God prove His existence to them before they will acknowledge Him.  For this is to put one’s self in the seat of judgment and, thus, at least equal to, if not above God.  The One True God doesn’t have to prove Himself to human beings or anyone else!  Rather, we have to answer to Him.  If you don’t like this it’s your problem, not His.

  1. All claims that immaterial entities exist are ridiculous because they can’t be      demonstrated scientifically.  So belief in the Biblical God is akin to belief in Santa Claus or the “flying spaghetti monster”.

There are plenty of immaterial entities which we all take for granted constantly.  First, there is logic, which (as indicated under the last point) cannot be observed in the physical world.  Rather, it must be assumed before all observation of this or, even, before any human thinking at all can occur.  Logic is the rules of thinking without which it would be impossible to distinguish what is reasonable from what is nonsense.

Next, there is human consciousness, which includes our self-awareness, our awareness of other people and our awareness of the world around us.  Although consciousness is associated with brain chemistry (at least in our current existence), it simply cannot be reduced to this (as we also established under the last point).

Another immaterial entity which we must assume to be real in order to get along in our world is morality.  As indicated previously, this also cannot be observed in the material world.

Finally, there is all of our experience and knowledge, including all scientific knowledge.  While scientific knowledge is about the world of objects, what we learn from Science is not in itself found in the physical world.

Furthermore, the study and understanding of these immaterial entities is just as possible as that of the material world using both evidence and reason, except that the “objects” of study are not objects, they are subjects.  This includes Anthropology, Sociology, Psychology and Theology, which is the study of The Ultimate Subject – God.  Though the first three are usually considered scientific fields, they are not physical Sciences because they seek understanding of people, who are more than just material entities governed by mindless laws of nature.

And, in practice, it is not hard to demonstrate rationally how The God described in the Bible must exist, as opposed to other claims of deity or conceptions of ultimate reality or obviously fictional characters.  We dealt with the first two under the last point.  As for fictional creatures, it is completely ridiculous to compare belief in The Creator God with belief that these are real.  This is because all sane adults know that fairy tales and fictitious creatures are made up.  But untold millions of people over thousands of years have based their lives on belief in The Creator God.  But, more importantly for the current point, all sane people in human history have assumed that they are real people.  And people are more than material bodies.

  1. Because Science has been proven to be the only reliable way to understand the physical world, then this world must be all that exists.

This is such an obvious fallacy that it is absolutely stunning that the entire modern philosophy of secular education (which is metaphysical Materialism and its corresponding epistemology of Empiricism) is based on it.  This is a fallacy of composition.  That Science enables us to understand one aspect of reality does not mean that this is all there is to reality.  The conclusion just doesn’t follow.  And it’s not just that the conclusion is believed to be true.  It is actually believed by many people in the developed world today that the success of Science has proven that God and other immaterial entities can’t exist.  This false logic is basis for the common “Science has made religion obsolete” claim.  But, those who believe this have actually turned Science into a religion in practice by viewing it as an all-explaining approach to reality.  It is a testament to the blinding power of a Philosophy/Religion that a small child is capable of understanding the logical error here, but Nobel Prize-winning scientists are not.

Instead, it must be recognized that there is an entire realm of reality in addition to the physical world.  Some of the reasons for this were given in point #4.  In addition to returning to Christian Theism as the correct understanding of reality, we must return to metaphysical Dualism, in which it is recognized that both bodies and minds (or souls or spirits) are real.  This is represented in the diagram which can be found on this blog entitled “The Creator and the Creation”.

  1.  Biblical Christianity is anti-Science and anti-Reason.

Biblical Christianity is entirely compatible with proper Science – the study of the physical world as it works today.  Far from being anti-scientific, the rise of modern Science actually came under Christian Theism as the reigning worldview!  And the most fundamental scientific discoveries upon which the modern world is built (especially electricity and artificial propulsion) were achieved by many scientists who were Bible-believing Christians and during a time when most scientists were Christians.  And even the most revered pioneer of the last century, Albert Einstein, was a Theist.  Finally, many scientists are Bible-believing Christians today.

But modern Science has become an illegitimate, anti-Christian religion by claiming to be the only means of obtaining knowledge.  The most prominent example of this is the evolutionary approach to the origin of the universe and life, which assumes that ultimate reality consists only matter/energy and mindless forces of nature in space/time.  Not only is this an article of pure blind faith because it is unknowable in principle, it also essentially denies the existence of all subjects and subjectivity.  So, the philosophy underlying Evolution is both anti-Christian and anti-rational (since rationality in itself is not material).  Furthermore, (as indicated previously under the second point) without an Intelligent Creator the existence of human intelligence simply can’t be explained.

  1. We can know what happened in the past and what will happen in the future based on what we understand about how nature works now.

First, it is a fallacy to assume that there could not have been past supernatural influence in how the universe came to be as we observe it today.  This possibility simply can’t be ruled out.  Amazingly, this possibility alone means that we cannot understand the distant past or the future based on the present.  In other words, Science alone cannot tell us how old the universe, the earth and all life is, or how they came to be (or about the future of the universe).

Another common fallacy is the belief that to accept the possibility of supernatural influence would destroy Science.  As common as this idea is, it is a false dilemma.  On the contrary, it is the natural order which God built into the universe combined with our God-given ability to understand this (as rational creatures created to be like Him) which is actually what makes Science possible.  Without The Creator God no credible explanation has been given for why this order exists, nor for why it is that we are capable of understanding it.

All radiometric dating methods used to determine the ages of things in the natural world falsely assume the unknowable conclusion that the only possible influences on nature are the natural forces which we understand today acting identically to how we observe them acting today.  This is a four-fold fallacy, in assuming that we know all of the natural forces involved, assuming that we know these and the conditions in which they operated sufficiently, assuming that these natural forces always worked exactly as they do today, and assuming without warrant only natural forces.  In effect, most scientists today implicitly assume and proceed as though Science has now reached a complete understanding of the forces of nature.  But this is simply an arrogant and dogmatic presumption and a belief that, far from helping advance Science, has actually always tended to block progress in Science in the past.

It is one of the most amazing facts of Modernity that, although it has become almost universally-accepted, all so-called “Scientific” speculation about what happened in the beginning of the universe and what will happen in the future is actually invalid.  This is because all such speculation is based on a four-fold fallacy, any one of which is enough to render such speculations illegitimate.  The first is: Do we really know all of the relevant forces involved in producing what we observe today?  This has been a common error throughout the history of Science.  But do we really know we are not still guilty of it?  The answer is: No.  We simply can’t know what we don’t know!

Second, even if we have come to know all of the natural forces involved, can we really assume we know them well enough to understand all of their effects?  Once again, this has proven to be a faulty assumption on many occasions in the history of Science.

Third, can we really assume that the natural forces which we observe today always worked exactly as we observe them today?  Indeed, basic Science is dependent on this assumption, so this is clearly valid over the short-term.  But isn’t it merely a matter of “blind faith” to assume that the forces of nature could not have worked differently in the past or that they might in the future?  Indeed, can we even speak of the existence of forces of nature in the Singularity which was believed to exist prior to the supposed “Big Bang”?

The first three betray a presumption that we now have come to a complete knowledge of how the universe works.  But, such hubris, far from protecting Science, has always hindered the progress of Science in the past.

This brings us to the fourth fallacy, which is the denial of the possibility of the Supernatural.  While I anticipate that many of you will snicker over this one, the important thing to ask is: Why do you dismiss this as impossible and ridiculous?  Does the fact that you have never observed a miracle mean that such events are impossible?  No, this just doesn’t follow.  Nor does the fact that Science is the proper way to study Nature does mean that Nature is all that can exist (as was discussed in the previous point).  Your dismissal of the possibility that the Supernatural exists is both arbitrary and irrational.

Furthermore, the common charge that allowing for the possibility of Divine influence in the universe would invalidate all Science is also a clear fallacy.  Indeed, in order for a miracle to be recognized as such actually requires common knowledge of the natural order, of which the miracle is seen as a unique exception.  In other words, the world which Science studies must be presupposed, otherwise miracles would be unrecognizable.

It is historically incorrect to assume that the ancients had no understanding of natural laws.  While the world in which Judaism and Christianity emerged certainly lacked the scientific sophistication of today, it was not a world which was hopelessly lost in superstition.  The reality is that no society can exist without understanding a good deal about the forces of nature, whether consciously or unconsciously.  In fact, it is not even possible for any individual to do this.  For, even the truly insane must or they will quickly perish.

All of this means that, despite the unquestioned value of the process of induction regarding how the universe works today as one of the foundations of proper Science, one simply cannot use induction in order to understand what happened in the distant past or what will happen in the future.  For, strictly speaking, such questions are not subject to scientific examination.

Thus, to believe in the speculations of modern Cosmologists and, even, to believe in general that we can know the past or future based on the present is essentially a religious position.  It is an act of blind faith by people who arbitrarily and, thus, falsely reject the possibility of an Almighty Creator God.  The existence of the Almighty Creator God described in the Bible cannot be ruled out.  And the mere possibility of God’s existence means that “all bets are off” concerning both the origins and future of the universe.  For, this possibility is a huge unaccountable Variable which makes all extrapolations from the present to the past or future dubious.

It has become common for advocates of Intelligent Design to defend their work as Scientific, and rightly so, for this can easily been demonstrated for anyone who is the least bit open to seeing this.  But, at the same time, it must be recognized that those who arbitrarily reject a Creator are making a religious claim no less than those who presuppose an Intelligent Designer.  In other words, this is not a matter of “Science vs. Religion”.  It is a question of which Religion is the true basis of Science: the reductionistic Materialism/Empiricism which dominates the academic world today, or Christian Theism?

We assert that it is Christian Theism which alone explains why anything exists, why the universe has order and why it is that we can come to understand this order (or, for that matter, why we exist as people and can experience or know anything).  Without an Intelligent Creator human intelligence cannot be explained.  On the other hand, the Philosophy/Religion assumed by most scientists and intellectuals and, indeed, by most people today absurdly reduces the universe to being composed, ultimately, only of objects without any knowing subjects.  The rejection of Christian Theism, far from being a positive development in intellectual history, is actually The Biggest Error in human history.

  1. I am not religious because my beliefs are all scientifically-based.

You have many beliefs which cannot be scientifically demonstrated in practice or, even, in principle, especially your faith in logic, your belief in your existence as a person and the existence of other people along with countless things which you know about yourself and others, beliefs about the nature of ultimate reality (including the non-existence of The God described in the Bible), and beliefs about right and wrong.  So, we are all religious believers in one way or another.  The question is: Which religion is the correct one?  Christianity can be rationally demonstrated to be superior to all other approaches because it alone can account for all existence and knowledge.

You may wish to define “religious” more narrowly, but this simply is avoids the basic point that we are all in the same boat in having a set of fundamental beliefs which we simply assume but cannot verify or falsify scientifically.  You may call it your “philosophy” or “worldview” or “religion”.  It doesn’t matter what you call it.  But one thing it isn’t is scientific.

  1. It is always wrong to judge others.

This one is easy.  The statement itself is a judgment, so it is inherently self-contradictory and hypocritical.  In fact, all of us must constantly judge many things as to whether they are right or wrong or good or bad and we also frequently make judgments about people and their views so that we can decide whether or not to trust them and follow them.

  1. There is no such thing as absolute truth.

This is also a self-contradictory statement.  If there is no such thing as absolute truth, then it cannot be absolutely known that this is the case.

  1.  Every reasonable person knows that the Bible is filled with scientific impossibilities, evil teachings or actions done by or required by God and other errors.

All objections to what is in the Bible are based on the fundamental (and unknowable) assumption that The God described in the Bible doesn’t exist.  But all of them are answerable if one begins with the premise that this God does exist.  In other words, the Bible is internally coherent on this basis.  If God exists, He can do everything He is described as doing in the Bible because He is not bound by the laws of nature which He Himself created, nor can He be judged for His actions because human moral judgment is based on His own moral and rational Nature, which we have been given as creatures made in the image of our Creator.  He is The Perfectly Just Judge to Whom we must answer.  We cannot judge Him.

This statement is also a fallacy because most people who say this today have little or no knowledge of what is actually in the Bible.  You simply can’t know something which you have never studied.  Furthermore, even among the most advanced scholars of the Bible, no one has ever proven that the Bible has an error.  For, all of supposed factual errors or contradictions in the Bible have conceivable explanations.  The fact that many are not open to these is their problem, not the Bible’s problem

18 thoughts on “Ten Widely-believed Fallacies Today

    • I welcome your reply, But there are numerous New Testament Scriptures, and even a few Old Testament ones which indicate a Plurality within God’s Being. (If you are really interested in considering them I will give you a bunch, though they are easy to find for anyone who truly wishes to do so.) In particular, Jesus so offended the Jews by declaring that He and the Father are One and that “before Abraham was, I Am” (a clear allusion to the OT Divine Name of God – Yahweh) that this was their stated reason for wanting Him executed. This Plurality does not compromise the Unity of God at all. There is no comparison between (a.) worshiping One God Who manifests Himself (so to speak) in Three Persons, Who are equally divine and completely united in purpose, and (b.) someone who worships multiple gods with distinct characteristics and purposes.

      You Christadelphians make the same mistake as Muslims and Jews. Who are you to say that we worship three Gods?! We know Who we worship! It is you who don’t understand how God can be both Three and One. Moreover, it is not at all unusual for something to be one in one respect but multiple in others (like a triangle, which has appropriately been used as a Christian symbol going back to the early Church). And, as I stated in the article, it cannot be denied that a strictly Monistic God cannot be fully and self-sufficiently Personal like The God of the Bible. Furthermore, our salvation requires the action of all Three Persons – the Father to send His Son to be our Savior, the Son to do what His Father sent Him to do (which we cannot do on our own), and the Spirit to apply the saving work of Christ to us (which we also cannot do on our own) and serve as our Counselor until Christ comes back.

      • Would you say that all those people who answer “I am” at the phone or when asked if they are so and so are God? Jesus replied that he was the man they were talking about, he did not say he was ‘The I am who is” the Elohim God of gods Hashem Jehovah.

        Why did God and Jesus did not tell the truth, the one saying “this is my only begotten beloved son”, the other “I can not do anything without my Father”, ‘I do not know when I shall return” , “i go to my Father” and Jesus sitting at the right hand of God being a mediator between God and man? When god is also Jesus he can not be the mediator between himself, and if Jesus is God why did he cry “God why have you abandoned me”?

      • The “I am” (or, in Greek, “eigo eimi”) is used by Jesus throughout John’s Gospel in such a way that the Jews couldn’t and didn’t miss it. This is especially true of the instance I cited previously. Furthermore, in Koine Greek it is not necessary to use the subject pronoun (“eigo”, or “I” in this case) with the “to be” verb. Use of it points to emphasis. In other words, Jesus is not just saying “I am”, He is saying: “I, Myself, am”.

        You Christadelphians and other anti-Trinitarian fringe cult-groups arrogantly claim that the vast majority of Christianity is wrong on something which has been agreed upon for more than 1500 years. While only God Himself completely understands the relationship between God the Father and God the Son and God the Spirit, all of the supposed contradictions and problems with the Trinity, as well as with the dual natures of the Son after His incarnation can be reasonably answered for anyone who is open to this. The question is: Are you truly open to the possibility that you are wrong and that orthodox theology is correct?

        As for being our Mediator, as Blaise Pascal pointed out over 1000 years ago (in “Why the God-man?”), our inability to save ourselves necessitated that our Mediator be both God and man. He needed to be God so that He did not inherit the sinful nature which all of us inherent, along with the guilt of Adam’s sin, and so that His death could satisfy the justice of God for all of God’s children before or after He came. But He also needed to be a man so that He could truly serve as our Substitute in keeping the Law of God which we had broken and paying the penalty of our disobedience. This included the necessity that He truly be tempted (yet without sinning), truly forsaken by His Heavenly Father (despite His perfect obedience in life), and truly die. Indeed, that His death was real is seen in the fact that He could not raise Himself, but is consistently described in the New Testament as being raised by God.

        For most of the first 20 years of my Christian life I tended to focus mostly on the Deity of Christ, but in the past 10 years it is His real humanity which has become so much more meaningful and precious to me. That Almighty God Himself (in the Person of the Eternal Son) would be willing to become a man, and a lowly one at that (as Jesus of Nazareth), endure unimaginable suffering, and actually die for me is by far the most wonderful, yet also the most humbling thing that I can imagine. You need to stop telling yourself that this is impossible and embrace the real Message of the New Testament. If you do you will find a peace and joy that you have never known. Then, you need to find a church where this Gospel is celebrated. I hope and pray that you will truly consider what I am saying and not just be thinking about how to refute it. This is not a debate between you and me, this is about your relationship with your Creator, Who invites you to make His Son your Savior and Lord, so that He will go from being your Judge to being your Almighty, All-wise and Perfectly-loving Heavenly Father, and so that you will receive His Presence within you in the Person of His Holy Spirit.

  1. We do hope you yourself or also, like we are ourselves and each of us can say “I, Myself, am”.’ does this makes us God?

    We do believe God can not tell lies, and do believe what He said. We are not twisting His words but take them like they are notated in the Holy Scriptures, the Bible, which we consider to be the Word of God, and as such also being telling the truth.
    Saying “our inability to save ourselves necessitated that our Mediator be both God and man” is proving that the adversary of God (Satan) was right then? It is not recognising what Jesus really did. Not accepting he really wanted to do the Will of his Father, his and our God, not wanting to believe he was a man of flesh and blood who gave his life, disacrifises and nullifies his offering. (Because God can not die, this was than a ludicrous fake moment, a performance like in the film of Monthy Pyton – the Life of Bryan.)

    How can it be “by far the most wonderful, yet also the most humbling thing” that you “can imagine”, when it was not really a dying God but a god who faked his death? (Or otherwise again there God would have lied.)

    • You err because you pit the divinity of Jesus against His humanity. There is nothing to prevent God from becoming a man while remaining God. This is not a logical problem. You only assume it is. Furthermore, the True God cannot stop being God in His essential being. That is an absurdity. Similarly, it is impossible for me to completely stop being me. But it actually is conceivable (and absolutely wonderful that God could give Himself over to the power of death so completely that He not be able to raise Himself and require that His Eternal Father raise Him. Again, this shows that our salvation is a matter of the Plurality of Persons within The Deity working together.

      And that one person can have two natures is actually demonstrated in all true believers in Jesus Christ, because we receive a new nature, which loves God and wants to serve Him, while also retaining our old sinful nature (regrettably, at least from our point-of-view), which is what leads us to continue sinning (though we trust that our new nature, governed by the Spirit, will gradually overcome our old nature). I suspect, though, that you don’t understand this because you have not yet received the new nature. This is because you continue to disbelieve the true Gospel.

      As I expressed previously, the primary problem with groups like yours, however, is that you are blocked by sinful pride from truly considering what God has done for our salvation, according to the Scriptures. So you arrogantly assume that every major tradition of Christianity has been wrong about the central truth of our faith. You presume that you must be correct and that we must be wrong. Why won’t you consider the possibility that your side has it wrong? Christians like me know that we were wrong until God opened our eyes to what He has done to save us. And, though only God can do this, we are all responsible to see our need for this and to ask Him to give us sight and saving faith.

      Once again, the real problem is that you can’t or won’t understand how “God so loved the world that He gave His Son that whosoever would believe on Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” (John 3:16) No other man is described in the Scriptures as being “given” by God Himself. No other man is described as being uniquely conceived like Jesus. No other man made the claims that Jesus did. And no other man has been worshiped and served like Him. “Jesus is Lord” in the same way that Yahweh (the mostly, though not completely undifferentiated God of Israel) was called Lord.

      You, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and others are trying to re-fight a doctrinal issue which was resolved over 1500 years ago. There is plenty of documentation for this available. But you must be willing to re-consider your position. Unlike you, I (along with millions of other believers) have done so and gone from unbelief to belief. And in doing so we have gone from being under God as our dreaded Judge to having God as our Father, Lord and Counselor.

      • We do just believe in God, Who so loved the world, that He gave His Son. It is in that son we have put our hope. and like the apostle says “whosoever would believe on Him (the son) should not perish but have everlasting life.”

      • If your hope truly is in Jesus Christ and you truly believe that He died for your sins and that God raised Him from the dead for your justification (Romans 10:9-10), then we agree on The Most Important Truth and our disagreements would not be “crucial” (Pun intended.). I have known people in churches which we regard as questionable at best, either for their doctrines or practices, who, nonetheless, properly understand the Gospel and believe in Christ as their Savior and Lord. I do wonder, however, if such people would be better off joining a church which does not regard all traditional Christian denominations as fundamentally-flawed. I also disagree with people in churches of which I have been a member who have a “my church is the only true church” view. Regrettably, this is a problem in most churches.

  2. In case you would have looked more in the ideas of the Christadelphians you would have seen that we are not a church which says that only members of our church are being saved. We do believe that the many Christians churches are the members of the Body of Christ and that it is the heart (which is known by God) which shall be important to make out if a person can enter the Kingdom of God. We do even believe a person may have come to know Christ be baptised, calling himself reborn, but still can miss the entering the Kingdom of God. When there is not the right attitude nor the will to have regrets of the faults done and no works of Faith, then the person shall like all other non-believers and find his way back into death (no matter which denomination he or she had been in). For God it is the inner soul that counts not the outer shining of belonging to this or such church.

    • If your last post is true then that is well and good. But, remember, you were the one who first accused me of teaching false doctrine, which I naturally took to mean that you believe that my theology is spiritually destructive. I apologize if I was wrong on this. But, I have encountered people from the Christadelphians in the past who have had an attitude of superiority in assuming that they are above all denominational debates. Since becoming a real believer in The God described in the Bible and in the Bible as His Word, I have come to realize that there are two types of theological divisions within Christianity: those between true believers in the Bible, based on differing interpretations, and those between true believers and those who really don’t see the uniqueness of the Bible, Christianity or The God of The Bible. While the first type of division is simply a matter of disagreements among people who are ultimately on the same side, the latter division is the critical one, because it concerns the question of: What is the essence of Christianity?

  3. I have a question, what if we had a very powerful computer that could simulate a small part of our universe (according to the laws of physics), and we put a human (body) in it, what do you think would happen? I don’t see why that person would need a ‘mind’ to function. Also, logic isn’t part of the material world, but neither are maths, numbers, and the rules of chess. I don’t think logic is any more fundamental than those other things, and I don’t think it makes much sense to say that maths cannot be explained if matter is all that exists.

    • Are you proposing putting a human body into a computer simulation or a human person? A human body is just that, a body, unless it has an animating spirit (or functioning mind). And you can’t say that logic, math, morals and many other things (actually, all human experience and knowledge) exist and aren’t part of the material world if the latter is all that exists. That is a logical contradiction: If A = Material things & B = Math or logic, or other immaterial entities, and if A is all that exists, then there would be no B.

      • Hello, thanks for your quick response. Yes, what it meant was the human body, all the atoms that make it up. In that simulation, all the atoms would follow the physical laws, and I was wondering what you thought would happen. Would that person (the body, if you will) just continue its daily routine, would it not do anything at all, or would it just be a thing without experiences? The second thing I meant was that if concepts such as logic, numbers, rules of chess, etc. can exist in a material brain, it doesn’t require anything immaterial to exist (I only now realize this is a subject of discussion). I don’t think we can know if we live in a computer simulation.

      • You’re welcome. We maintain that we are immaterial spirits (or souls) housed in bodies. So, we would say that a body without a spirit can’t do anything. That is what happens at the point of death. If you think about it, the physical condition of the body from the moment before death to the moment of death often doesn’t change perceptively (except in cases of violent death). So a physical cause can’t really be identified.

        And you are assuming without warrant that logic, math, morality, etc. exist in our material brains. But we say that we are logical, moral spiritual beings joined to material bodies (including our brains). As I have already asserted, we are not our brains. Rather, we have brains, which we can use in various ways and which also maintain the rest of our bodies.

        As for the computer simulation point, I am actually a big fan of “The Matrix” movies, but, if you think about it, even this has a “real world” into which some have been liberated from the simulation. In any event, even if we were existing in a computer simulation, “we” would still truly exist in some form as the subjects of the illusion. Saying otherwise makes everything meaningless, which no one truly believes. It is interesting to consider that the computer simulation idea is actually only a modern version of a very old theory: that we are all under the spell of a lying “Demi-urge”. Such a proposal is actually impossible to disprove, but isn’t at all helpful. We must live on the basis that, in the vast majority of cases, at least, things are as they appear. But I would admit that it is only my faith in The Creator God (Who cannot lie) that assures me that we are not being deceived on the grandest scale and that the universe which we perceive actually corresponds with what is “out there”. So, Christian faith is necessary not just for forgiveness of sins and salvation, but also to have any certainty about anything.

  4. Only if the mind is considered to be the action of a physical brain, unifying the two at the deepest level, can the problem be resolved. Even if a spirit of God or man truly existed (something which is inherently unverifiable), the only thing available to it are its own thoughts. There’s no coupling in either direction between a spirit and the world. Creationists insist that we must teach intelligent design in public schools as science, but they cannot state, using physics or even metaphysics, the specific mechanism by which that intelligence interacts with reality.

    • Your thinking is twisted here. You falsely assume that there is an unbridgeable gap between minds and the outside world, as both Rationalists and Materialists are always driven to assume. But this is only because you arbitrarily reject the Christian explanation: that our minds can rightly interpret what is “out there” because God made our minds to be in sync with the world around us so that we can understand it analogously to the way He understands what He has made (though, of course, in a limited, finite way).

  5. 1. Every reasonable person knows the God described in the Bible can’t exist.

    A god which is described as a bodiless spirit who nevertheless has “back parts” visible to Moses cannot exist.

    A god which is decribed as knowing the end from the beginning who nevertheless repents for creating man (Genesis) or picking Saul to be king (1 Samuel) cannot exist.

    A god which is described as love who nevertheless drowns every baby in the world cannot exist.

    • We say that for God to “repent” has a different meaning than it means for us to do so, and that the original readers and believers since then understand this. As mysterious as it may be to us, Scripture reports that God does at times change His mind. This is what is referred to here.

      And if God created everything and everyone, can’t He do with His Creation as He pleases? This is not to say that everything He does is good by definition. Actually, we say that everything God does is good because He is The Perfectly-Good Person. There may not seem to be a difference between these two statements, but there really is a huge one. The first would make goodness and evil arbitrary, while the second makes them real and absolute.

      And, as all unbelievers tend to do, you only assume that what the Bible describes Him doing is wrong at various points. But, how do you know this is the case? To know this would require that you know the situations as well as God does. But, if He really exists, as we say He must, then this can’t be the case. Moreover, to argue that God can’t exist because I don’t agree with what He is described as doing is an irrational argument.

      Have you read my latest post here? I think it could be quite helpful to you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s