re: Amazon Prime new cartoon retells the creation story

quote:

---

I don’t think so. The example I used was the Bible is the Truth, because the Truth is in the Bible. That’s foomanchoo circular logic. Two things that depend on each other in both directions. A proves B, because B proves A. That’s circular and that’s what I’m describing.

---

I’ve been too busy lately to participate (Prodigal has been doing a great job of defending the Faith against your irrational hatred of your maker from what I can tell) but I just happened to peek in and see this nonsense.

I just want to mention a couple things: first a circular argument is not always fallacious. Only viciously circular arguments are fallacious. When you are arguing about ultimates, you necessarily wander into the realm of the circular because you cannot appeal to anything greater. For example, if I asked you to defend the existence of the laws of logic without using logic, you couldn’t do it.

For the Christian, the Bible is God’s revelation and the basis for our Faith. Without the Bible, we would not have the Gospel which is recorded in it, and no Gospel means no knowledge of the only means of salvation from the sins we know we commit. Therefore, while the existence of God can be shown from nature, all that knowledge can do is make men even more culpable for their damnation; it cannot save. To abandon the Bible is to reject both a clear evidence for the specific God of the universe as well as reject the only means of the knowledge of salvation. If the Bible is God’s word, then it is not off limits since it is God’s own testimony for Himself and the ultimate standard that cannot appeal to anything greater.

Second: when I argue the existence of God, I use biblical concepts but I typically use the transcendental argument for God, which is a philosophical argument based on biblical truth: the proof of God’s existence is that if He did not exist, you couldn’t prove anything. God is the necessary precondition for intelligibility and you couldn’t make sense of reality if He did not exist. I spend a lot of time talking about this argument as it is applied to morality to show the arbitrary/irrational nature of moral standards if God did not exist.

So please stop mischaracterizing my position and my arguments. Embrace the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ before you have to give an account to the maker you claim doesn’t exist.