Anti-Bible Commenter Tries To Reverse the Burden of Proof

How can we know anything about anything

To try to explain truth to him who loves it not is but to give him more plentiful material for misinterpretation. George Macdonald

Do we have to make a choice between science and the Bible?

NO!

That is NOT where the problem is, but that is what everyone seems to want to talk about.

Take science as an example. How can we know anything about the created material world around us?

How can we know anything from what we can see using natural sciences?

We all see the same things in the material world, but we don't come to the same answers.

Why is that?

How can we know anything about the Bible and what it teaches? Every person believes different things about the Bible and how it should be read.

Why is that?

Same scientific facts. Different answers.

Same Bible. Different answers.

Why is that?

The true question is this: How do we come to our answers that we get from what we can see through science or what we can read in the Bible?

How do we think about what we see using science or what we read in the Bible?

How do we analyze what we have seen and read?

How do we interpret what we have seen and read?

We use logic, but logic always has a foundation. Jesus talked about building on the Rock. That Rock is Jesus Christ. He is the true foundation. There are also the false foundations of the ungodly.

An example might help.

Question: Why do you believe in evolution?

Answer: Because my science teacher told me that evolution is scientific fact.

Question: Why do you believe your science teacher?

Answer: because he agrees with the textbook he assigned us to read.

Now, we have asked, "Why?" twice.

If we continued to ask, "Why?" we would come down to the foundation of this person's thoughts.

When we get down to the foundations, there are no more questions that can be answered. So where to the foundations come from?

There are three possibilities.

things that we make up, pulled from the air
demonic lies
divine revelation

Question: Why do you believe in creation?

Answer: Because God revealed this to me. He spoke to me through the Bible and gave me His faith so that I could believe Him.

See how quickly we got to the foundation. This is a belief that has a foundation that is solid and that cannot be moved.

In reality, the things that we make up, that are pulled from the air, are actually from demons and all the lies of demons spring from the prince of demons, Satan. So these are one and the same.

Divine revelation comes from the Almighty, Creator, God, Jesus Christ. So there are only two choices, but how do we know there are only two choices? Because God has revealed this truth to us.

The question then is how do we tell the difference between the revelation that comes from God and the lies of Satan?

The answer is that everyone who sincerely wants to do the will of God will know.

Jesus said, "If you really want to obey God, you will know if what I teach comes from God or from me"

The rejection of the revelation that comes from God is not an intellectual problem. It is a moral problem.

Jesus said, "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and you shall find; knock, and it shall be opened to you: For everyone who asks receives; and he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks it shall be opened." *

Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to those who ask him? Matthew 7:7-11 *

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. You can set the truth before someone, but you can't make anyone believe those things that they don't want to submit to. They have to want to obey God.

How frequently it is brought to our attention that nothing good can be done if the will is wrong! Reason alone fails to justify itself. Richard M. Weaver

Jesus said, "You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free" (John 8:32)

"If we are not prepared to buy the truth at the cost of our own humbling we shall not receive it"

Lies appear to have no price upon them. They seem cheap and they abound everywhere. But for the truth there is always an obvious price to pay.

"[God] has set a day when He will judge all the world's people with fairness. And He has chosen the man Jesus to do the judging for Him. God has given proof of this to all of us by raising Jesus from death" (Acts 17:31).

"There is a judge for the one who rejects Me [Jesus] and does not accept My words; that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day" (John 12:48)

That also stands for every person who speaks the utterances of Jesus. When we hear them, we hear Jesus Christ, and we either accept or reject. Every person who follows Jesus Christ is commanded to only speak His utterances and not their own.

"When we love others, we know that we belong to the truth, and we feel at ease in the presence of God" (1 John 3:19)

Ravi Zacharias did two open forums in a university. On the second night, one man told him that he had brought two Atheists in the night before who said that the arguments presented were so strong that they could not contend with them, but they were going to remain Atheists because that is what they prefer to be true.

In another case of just listening to an unbeliever and drawing out his reasoning, the unbeliever finally came to his foundations.

They turned out to be assumptions that were pulled from the air. When asked why he believed his basic assumption, the unbeliever looked startled and blurted out, "I guess I'm making the whole thing up." It was quite a revelation to him since he hadn't even known that he had any assumptions. However, he decided to remain an Atheist because he didn't want God to rule over him.

The Magic Trick

An anonymous commenter writes:

"It is interesting that you say that research done by others is "lies, creative stories, loopy logic, and insanity' however you do not support any of your statements with evidence. Debate is essential to maintain a high quality of research in society however you must support your claims. As I am sure you know the best kind of evidence is peer reviewed research, conducted without bias. I encourage you to seek evidence to support your argument..."

Answer:

The comment above is slick Neuro Linguistic Programming hypnotic technique mixed with deception. Neuro Linguistic Programming techniques are the same techniques that people use on themselves to make themselves believe in lies. They don't always use these techniques on purpose. It comes naturally.

The first sentence has two distinct parts.   The first part is a misquote   that is wrapped in a Neuro Linguistic Programming (hypnotic technique) double-nested presupposition, and presuppositions are used to mask the fact that the misquote amounts to an equivocation and the clever use of circular reasoning.   The second part is also not true and is a misdirection.

"It is interesting that you say that research done by others is "lies, creative stories, loopy logic, and insanity'"

The false statement that is being presupposed is that the SeekFind.net page says, "research done by others is 'lies, creative stories, loopy logic, and insanity'"

The SeekFind.net page actually says: "Evolutionism maintains itself on lies, creative stories, loopy logic, and insanity."   This is a true statement and the evidence of this can be found on many pages in this site.   The HIV hoax is just one of the examples.

This misquote is also an interesting bit of equivocation (changing the meaning of a word in the middle of a thought to confuse the audience).   The hidden claim is that "Evolutionism" equals "research done by others."   Is that true?   Does "Evolutionism" equal "research done by others?"   Are these really equivalent thoughts as this bit of equivocation implies?   Is Evolutionism based on "research" or is it based on "lies, creative stories, loopy logic, and insanity"?   Surprise!   Our commenter is assuming the very thing that he or she is trying to prove--this small half of a sentence also contains some crafty begging the question (assuming the point at issue), which is sometimes called circular reasoning.   For those who engage in conversations with Evolutionists, the public schools are intense training grounds for this type of loopy logic.   (It's a shame that tax dollars are wasted in this way causing so much destruction of young minds.)   This is why you may feel frustrated and confused when talking to Evolutionists.   Notice that four different self-deceptive methods of faulty logic are being used in one half of one sentence.   When you are actively engaged in a conversation, analysis of this type of logic is quite difficult.   You may be able to catch two or even three of the logical errors, but the objective seems to be to overload you with baloney so that you have trouble responding to the actual issue and keeping the discussion on track.

It is important to know about presuppositions.   They are powerful.   The classic example of a presupposition is that of the lawyer who asks, "Are you still beating your wife?"   The presupposition is the word, "still."   Nested presuppositions, such as the one used by our commenter, are harder to respond to.   This lawyer might have nested the presupposition by saying, "You know that you are still beating your wife."   The lawyer is then accusing the person of knowing and the knowing presupposes that the beating is still going on and the "still" presupposes the beating.

There can be times when there nothing wrong with using presuppositions, but you should be aware that they tend to keep people from addressing the actual message.   As a result, the actual message is accepted without being challenged and it is tucked away in the mind.   There is something wrong with presupposing a lie as you see in this example.

The first presupposition in our commenter's first sentence is this:   "It is interesting."     The second presupposition, nested in the first, is in the word, "that," followed by, "you say," followed by the misquote and the begging of the question.

"however you do not support any of your statements with evidence."

First, while it might be true the SeekFind.net sometimes makes statements as declarations without supplying any evidence at all (I suppose that everyone does this), it is not true that SeekFind.net does not support any of its statements with evidence.   This site is filled with evidence, and much of this evidence supports the statement to which our commenter is referring.   Second, the commenter is trying to shift the burden of proof regarding whether HIV/AIDS research demonstrats Evolution.   Note that numerous Atheist and Evolutionist websites and other Atheistic and Liberal evangelistic efforts contend that HIV is an example or proof of Evolutionism's assumptions.   We have seen no evidence presented to support these contentions.   SeekFind.net has to assume that the Atheist and Liberal websites, PBS programs, etc. would have presented evidence if there were any.   The Evolutionists do have the burden of proof just as anyone claiming that God does not exist has the burden of proof.

"Debate is essential to maintain a high quality of research in society however you must support your claims.   As I am sure you know the best kind of evidence is peer reviewed research, conducted without bias.   I encourage you to seek evidence to support your argument."

Our anonymous commenter makes several statements here without supplying any evidence to support the commenter's argument, which is interesting since the commenter is claiming that in his or her set of rules SeekFind.net should supply evidence for claims made.   Perhaps this is a case of applying a double standard.   The commenter claims: "Debate is essential to maintain a high quality of research in society."   Is that true?   Is there good science to back that up or is it simply a baseless statement that is taken as an axiom?   Axioms are just assumptions, things that people make up and claim to be true.   Perhaps debate rarely results in high-quality research in society.

The commenter again uses presupposition: "As I am sure you know."   What is the evidence that proves that the best kind of evidence is peer reviewed research?   The Bible does say: "Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed."   However, it also says: "Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful."   It also says: "The fool has said in his heart that there is no God."   It also warns of taking the advice of a fool.   Who are the peers?   Are they ungodly or godly?   The commenter again takes the role of advisor, urging SeekFind.net to seek evidence, a site that is filled with all kinds of evidence, yet the commenter offers no evidence for his or her claims and uses all sorts of poor reasoning in making those claims.

Anti-Bible Commenter Tries To Reverse the Burden of Proof

How can we know anything about anything

The Magic Trick

An anonymous commenter writes:

Answer:

Questions and Answers

Contact Form