False Appeal to Heaven |
You are here:
Meaning
>
Christian Witness
>
Encyclopedia of Logical Fallacies
>
Flawed Evidence
>
False Appeal to Heaven
|
Logical Fallacy of False Appeal to Heaven / Appeal to Heaven / Gott Mit Uns / Manfest Destiny / Special CovenantThe Logical Fallacy of False Appeal to Heaven / Appeal to Heaven / Gott Mit Uns / Manfest Destiny / Special Covenant occurs when it is falsely asserted that God (or a higher power) has ordered, supports or approves one's own standpoint or actions, so no further justification is required and no serious challenge is possible. This is Jezebel's and Ahab's fallacy. "We need to take away your land, since God [or Destiny, or Fate, or Heaven, or the ecological crisis] has given it to us.") A private individual who seriously asserts this fallacy risks ending up in a psychiatric ward, but groups or nations who do it have the power of the sword. False appeal to heaven is one of the many smokescreens that are used to cover the fact that the reasoning is based on one of the three fallacies of Agrippa's trilemma. Whenever a logical fallacy is committed, the fallacy has its roots in Agrippa's trilemma. All human thought (without Divine revelation) is based on one of three unhappy possibilities. These three possibilities are infinite regression, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. This problem is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Some have claimed that only logic and math can be known without Divine revelation; however, that is not true. Without Divine revelation, neither logic nor math can be known. Science is also limited to the pragmatic because of the weakness on human reasoning, which is known as Agrippa's trilemma. The fallacy of appeal to Heaven occurs occurs when it is claimed that a right is given (or an action condoned/commanded) by God, yet God did not give any such right (or condoned/commanded an action). God has given certain responsibilities to Governments. When they begin to abuse the people whom God put under their care, God will hold them accountable. God has given certain responsibilities to parents and to leaders in the Church, and He holds them accountable. The same goes for employers, supervisors, and managers. With responsibility comes authority. The fallacie of manifest destiny / false appeal to Heaven are sometimes simply misused or misdirected authority. Other time, it is claiming authority that was never given by God. Note that an Atheist will claim that anyone who believes anything that God says is committing this fallacy. The Agnostic claims to somehow know that no one can know the will of God. However, when Atheists/Agnostics claims this, they are claiming that God does not speak and their claim commits the logical fallacy of unsupported assertion. In fact, anyone can test whether or not God speaks. He will reveal Himself and His will to anyone who keeps on seeking Him with sincerity, respect, humility (knowing their need for God), and a submissive will to do God’s will. When you hear the confident, and impossible, claims of the skeptics, it is very important to remember Agrippa's Trilemma. In secularist thinking the only three options are to make any conclusions based on infinite regression, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. Axiomatic thinking is a kind way of saying "making assumptions." Making assumptions is a kind way of saying "making things up" or "lying." For a person to put any weight on a hypotheses or a theory that involves assumptions is irrational because a chain of thought is only as strong as its weakest link. Made up stories and assumptions have no strength at all. On the other hand, for those who follow Christ, it is not necessary to have all reason destroyed by Agrippa's Trilemma, since you have another option. That option is Divine revelation. Going beyond what God reveals to you is unnecessary. For many things, it's OK to admit that you don't know. Don't make up stories and deceive yourself into thinking that fabrications are part of reality. Evidence that is brought from a secularist presupposition is always some form of hypotheses because of Agrippa's Trilemma. This is what the LORD Almighty says: "Do not listen to what the prophets are prophesying to you; they fill you with false hopes. They speak visions from their own minds, not from the mouth of the LORD. Jeremiah 23:16 God is well aware of the fact that people claim to have revelation. Some use gods as their excuse. Some use the true God as an excuse like the false prophets who gave Ahab false prophecy while the true prophet, Micaiah, spoke the words of God. Many use the human mind and reason (but they mean rationalization) as an excuse. Those who worship rationalized thinking will say insane things such as, "Through reason, you can evaluate the choices regarding Hell, it's nature, and whether it even exists, and you can make a decision on based on reason." How would you do that without Divine revelation? They are false prophets unless God is speaking to them and they are rightly giving what God has revealed. Note that it may seem to be difficult to tell when someone is speaking the words of God or words out of the fallen human mind. You can write off those who claim that God doesn’t speak and those who don’t seek God to stand in His Presence right away. If there is any person who claims to be the one through whom God speaks, run, don't walk, away from that person. We have the Bible that God tells us is without error. If what is being said is in conflict with what the Bible says, then it is not from God. If you stand in God’s Presence and ask Him to guide you in this area, He will. If you will to do God’s will, you will be able to know by the Spirit. Jesus said, “Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own.” John 7:17 The same is true today. When we don’t really want to do the will of God, we have trouble discerning the truth from error. (read) Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Appeal to Heaven / Appeal to Heaven / Gott Mit Uns / Manfest Destiny / Special CovenantThe govenments of the world have claimed power over the property of the people. Sometimes, they claim that God gaven them the right. Sometimes, they claim that reason gave them the right. In any case, abuse happens, and people are hurt. Sometimes, this reasoning is used to make war against countries and people who have done nothing against the warring nation.
This call to war is given in the Koran.
What a great example of manifest destiny. King Ahab wanted to buy a field. Naboth would not sell. Jezebel, Ahab's wife had a plan to get rid of Naboth, which she did. Ahab got the field, but the prophet came and pronounced God's judgment against Ahab. He human mind can rationalize anything, but God is just. In the final analysis, justice is absolute. Self-serving people in positions of authority need to take warning.
God never contradicts Himself. He plainly speaks through Scripture. Through Scripture, He says not to commit adultery. Sandra is making things up and blaming God for it. Any time anyone says, "Thus says the Lord . . ." There is great responsibility to make sure that God's words are given purely.
The Bible in no way says this. Besides this, the Bible doesn't talk. God speaks through the Bible. And God doesn't condone sin. Sin is the act of either slipping or stepping off of the path that leads to the genuine and absolute fullness of life. God does give personal revelation moment-by-moment for this purpose. However, His personal revelation is always in concert with what He says through the Bible. The Bible must be interpreted by the Holy Spirit. The human mind is not capable of interpreting it. When God speaks through the Bible, He does not twist the language. God speaks plainly.
![]()
How can we know anything about anything? That’s the real question |
Other Pages in this sectionProof by Fallacy Evidence Surrogate Error in Observation Misrepresenting the Facts Distorted Evidence Unverified Evidence Hysteron Proteron Unsubstantiated Inference Assuming Facts Not In Evidence Wishful Thinking Appeal to Worldview Slippery Slope Limited Scope Mind Reading Shoehorning Confirmation Bias Sacred Cow Fantasy Projection Group Think Context Imposition Psychologist\'s Fallacy Amazing Familiarity Stolen Concept Weak Inference Proof by Theoretical Stories Anecdotal Evidence Dismissing All Personal Testimony Rewriting History Proof by Model Proof by Assumption Personal Incredulity Argument by Lack of Imagination Argument by Imagination Capturing the Naive Argument from Personal Astonishment Special Pleading Variant Imagization Self-Exclusion Unintended Self-Inclusion Ad Personam Proof by Repeated Assertion Cherishing the Zombie Argumentum Ad Lapidem Understatement Tautology Declaring Victory Assumption Correction Assumption Questionable Criteria Summary Dismissal Thought-Terminating Cliche Truism Perfectionist Fallacy Worst Case Scenario Fallacy Unwarranted Extrapolation Untestability Subjectivist Fallacy Bizarre Hypothesis Least Plausible Hypothesis Extravagant Hypothesis Privileging the Hypothesis Canceling Hypotheses Appeal to False Faith Inaccurate Models Hedging Politician\'s \"We\" Appeal to Nature Experimenter Bias Crucial Experiment Hearsay Ad Hoc Rescue Hindsight Bias Fallacy of the Beard Argument from Fallacy Inflation of Conflict Infinite Regress Reification Personification Slothful Induction Superstitious Thinking Meaningless Question Proving Non-Existence Argumentum ad Imaginibus Statement of Conversion Outdated Information Argument by Laziness Alien Fallacy Quantum Physics Fallacy Fallacious Abstraction Appeal to the Unknown Grasping at Straws Pragmatism Fake Hope Appeal to Intuition Appeal to Mystery Argument from Design Untestability Imaginary Evidence Monopolizing the Question Fallacy of Antecedent Faulty Predictor Pretentious Antecedent Pretentious Premise Recently Viewed |