Tweet
The Fallacy of Demanding Pertinent Evidence
I hear the same fallacies over and over again from the Unsaved Trash who come here to drag us down to Hell. It is always the same old yarn: "Where is the evidence for your claim to knowledge, Christian?"
By using a minimal amount of thought it is easy to see that this demand for evidence is a red herring being dragged perpendicular to the Path of Salvation, on an arc leading to Hell paved with bricks made from aborted fetuses, spackled together with the frothy bi-products of anal sex.
What if we demanded evidence for every claim, across the board? We would have to employ the scientific method before believing that the Earth is flat, as the Bible claims. We would have to rigorously test pharmaceuticals before releasing them to the public. We would have to put up video cameras in front of ATMs, and in banks, instead of just picking the darkest guy in the lineup. We would have to rely on UN weapons inspectors before invading countries like Iraq. Nothing would get done right. The world would be in chaos, much like it is now, due to faith in science.
If it wasn't for this fallacy of demanding evidence for the truth of claims, atheism would be forced out into the light, where it would dissolved into a puddle of bilge and bile. Atheism cannot survive the light of reason, because it is based entirely on this, and other fallacies.
Who is to say what evidence is pertinent anyway?
The Fallacy of Curiosity
Atheists often will ask questions that have no good answer (i.e. no answer that is compatible with the truth of the Bible). For example, they will point to the fossil record and ask how it is possible for the universe to be 6,000 years old, as the genealogies of the Bible indicate, when life has been evolving on Earth for 100s of millions of years. This question clearly has no answer, and is therefore totally irrational to ask.
Wise men realize that curiosity killed the cat.
The Fallacy of Thinking for Yourself
Atheists are always thinking of ways to justify having a mind of one's own, stating that not only would it be wrong for THEM to blindly follow the teachings of the Bible, but it is wrong for US TOO! It is clear that they will say anything to get us to accompany them into Eternal Fire, nothing short of demanding everyone to waste their energy on intellectual responsibility when they could be actively reinforcing what they already believe with a feedback loop of regurgitated conservative rhetoric. It is clear that the latter is more likely to fortify one against the onslaught of sinful culture, and therefore win God's favor on Judgment Day. Praise Him.
If everyone thought for themselves, imagine how much variety of opinion there would be. They couldn't all be right. Therefore, it stands to reason that whatever opinion is expressed by the Bible is the correct one.
The Fallacy of Demanding Logical Consistency
Sometimes the truth is a paradox. Only God really knows what is going on. Therefore, we must have faith in Him, and believe what He tells us believe in the Bible, even if it appears to be logically impossible. So the gospels give us two APPARENTLY contradictory genealogies of Jesus. Who is to say He didn't HAVE two contradictory genealogies? Just because I can't even understand what it means, doesn't mean I should believe it automatically. So what if the Bible's description of the cosmos fundamentally conflicts with the observations of the entire scientific community plus anyone with a telescope? Who is to say that a single book can't be more trustworthy than all the findings of science and what can be plainly seen through a telescope? What is wrong with giving special pleadings for the Bible? Jesus died temporarily on the cross for our filthy sins. Why not let God convince us with non-sequiturs? After all He has done for us! Not to mention, atheists use special pleading all the time to justify anal sex!
I hear the same fallacies over and over again from the Unsaved Trash who come here to drag us down to Hell. It is always the same old yarn: "Where is the evidence for your claim to knowledge, Christian?"
By using a minimal amount of thought it is easy to see that this demand for evidence is a red herring being dragged perpendicular to the Path of Salvation, on an arc leading to Hell paved with bricks made from aborted fetuses, spackled together with the frothy bi-products of anal sex.
What if we demanded evidence for every claim, across the board? We would have to employ the scientific method before believing that the Earth is flat, as the Bible claims. We would have to rigorously test pharmaceuticals before releasing them to the public. We would have to put up video cameras in front of ATMs, and in banks, instead of just picking the darkest guy in the lineup. We would have to rely on UN weapons inspectors before invading countries like Iraq. Nothing would get done right. The world would be in chaos, much like it is now, due to faith in science.
If it wasn't for this fallacy of demanding evidence for the truth of claims, atheism would be forced out into the light, where it would dissolved into a puddle of bilge and bile. Atheism cannot survive the light of reason, because it is based entirely on this, and other fallacies.
Who is to say what evidence is pertinent anyway?
The Fallacy of Curiosity
Atheists often will ask questions that have no good answer (i.e. no answer that is compatible with the truth of the Bible). For example, they will point to the fossil record and ask how it is possible for the universe to be 6,000 years old, as the genealogies of the Bible indicate, when life has been evolving on Earth for 100s of millions of years. This question clearly has no answer, and is therefore totally irrational to ask.
Wise men realize that curiosity killed the cat.
The Fallacy of Thinking for Yourself
Atheists are always thinking of ways to justify having a mind of one's own, stating that not only would it be wrong for THEM to blindly follow the teachings of the Bible, but it is wrong for US TOO! It is clear that they will say anything to get us to accompany them into Eternal Fire, nothing short of demanding everyone to waste their energy on intellectual responsibility when they could be actively reinforcing what they already believe with a feedback loop of regurgitated conservative rhetoric. It is clear that the latter is more likely to fortify one against the onslaught of sinful culture, and therefore win God's favor on Judgment Day. Praise Him.
If everyone thought for themselves, imagine how much variety of opinion there would be. They couldn't all be right. Therefore, it stands to reason that whatever opinion is expressed by the Bible is the correct one.
The Fallacy of Demanding Logical Consistency
Sometimes the truth is a paradox. Only God really knows what is going on. Therefore, we must have faith in Him, and believe what He tells us believe in the Bible, even if it appears to be logically impossible. So the gospels give us two APPARENTLY contradictory genealogies of Jesus. Who is to say He didn't HAVE two contradictory genealogies? Just because I can't even understand what it means, doesn't mean I should believe it automatically. So what if the Bible's description of the cosmos fundamentally conflicts with the observations of the entire scientific community plus anyone with a telescope? Who is to say that a single book can't be more trustworthy than all the findings of science and what can be plainly seen through a telescope? What is wrong with giving special pleadings for the Bible? Jesus died temporarily on the cross for our filthy sins. Why not let God convince us with non-sequiturs? After all He has done for us! Not to mention, atheists use special pleading all the time to justify anal sex!
Comment