11,143
edits
Logic and the Message: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
(Created page with "{| style="width:800px;" | <div style="text-align:center;border-bottom:3px solid #B8C7D9"> <div style="float:left;width:250px; padding:.3em 0; ;margin:2px 2px 0; background-col...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
{| style="width:800px;" | {| style="width:800px;" | ||
| | | | ||
[[File:Logic.jpg|250px|thumb|right|Don't confuse the issue with facts!]] | |||
The rules of logic are like the rules of mathematics or physics, they are not opinions that can be disregarded, they have always existed, and they follow a structure that God set up, he is a rational God, a God of order, and not confusion. For instance, it is not illogical in and of itself to believe in the supernatural, but if you have to break a dozen rules of logic while reviewing the evidence in order to support a single occurrence of the supernatural, then it is not spiritual or faithful to continue to believe that event occurred, rather, it is obtuse. | The rules of logic are like the rules of mathematics or physics, they are not opinions that can be disregarded, they have always existed, and they follow a structure that God set up, he is a rational God, a God of order, and not confusion. For instance, it is not illogical in and of itself to believe in the supernatural, but if you have to break a dozen rules of logic while reviewing the evidence in order to support a single occurrence of the supernatural, then it is not spiritual or faithful to continue to believe that event occurred, rather, it is obtuse. | ||
| Line 40: | Line 41: | ||
::“''You weren’t there when the cloud happened, so you don’t know how it happened''.” (Since we can’t go back in time and “be there” there is no possible way to prove it didn’t happen as William Branham said, though the evidence in this particular case is so strong, you could actually argue not only for an overwhelming inductive case, but also for an empirical, deductive refutation of his claim, because of the law of non-contradiction) | ::“''You weren’t there when the cloud happened, so you don’t know how it happened''.” (Since we can’t go back in time and “be there” there is no possible way to prove it didn’t happen as William Branham said, though the evidence in this particular case is so strong, you could actually argue not only for an overwhelming inductive case, but also for an empirical, deductive refutation of his claim, because of the law of non-contradiction) | ||
:7. '''The Red Herring''' - See our video on this logical fallacy - | |||
These are but a few logical fallacies, and nearly all I have seen have been implemented over the last several months by message ministers in a desperate attempt at a defense. | These are but a few logical fallacies, and nearly all I have seen have been implemented over the last several months by message ministers in a desperate attempt at a defense. | ||