April 12, 2015
My daughter has a saying posted on her refrigerator: "Just because it rhymes doesn't mean it's a good idea." I suppose that could be called the fallacy of endings.
There's also a fallacy of alliteration, which claims that if the beginnings of words are the same they must be related.
When I was a child my mother and father took me to hear revivalist Dr. Harvey Springer at a tent meeting outside Jackson, MI. I write about it in my upcoming book about growing up in America's Heartland as a Christian.
Springer used both of the above analogies to claim that Communism and Catholicism were one in the same because they both started with C's, ended with "ism's," and Nikita Khrushchev, the Soviet Premiere, and Pope Paul John XXIII were intent on taking over the world, one by our death, and one by us having more babies. In the middle of his hell-fire and brimstone sermon he draped a communist flag over two good looking, straight cut kids from the saw-dust audience and proclaimed in a roar that THIS is what would happen if America elected John. F. Kennedy (a Catholic) president of the United States.
These were Faulty Analogies, and unfortunately they are used every day to discredit what is true because the truth demands obedience.
This is where atheism comes in. Yes, it ends with an "ism" so it must also be a cult, or so my mother would say.
Atheism makes the declarative statement that there is no God because his existence is not visible in the observable and knowable universe with our physical senses. This is also a faulty analogy because it assumes that what is knowable must stimulate our physical senses in a direct way like a hug from mama as she smothers us in her bosom. The atheist claims, if it can't be touched, smelled, tasted or seen, then it doesn't exist.
Logically, the atheist doesn't have physical evidence that he or she has experience first hand for 95% of what they believe in. Oh, they see signs and representations of Pluto, and the Higg's Bosn, and they psychologically "feel" guilt…but they're virtually ignorant of such a thing's existence in the same way they demand evidence for God. I would argue that we have myriad of physical evidence that we touch, smell, taste, see and hear that cannot be explained outside a benevolent, intelligence force.
You must also consider that the atheist's body of knowledge in regard to the universe is a minute fraction of a decimal point of a percentage of what the universe it. A single man's knowledge is smaller than one can imagine, just the way our giant Earth is a spec on a spec, of a spec within a galaxy. So, in context, how can anyone argue logically that they are omniscient enough to declare "there is no God?"
They can't, and…
…that's why I'm Catholic.
May the Lord Be With You.
Stanley D. Williams, Ph.D.
Editorial at Nineveh's Crossing.com
My daughter has a saying posted on her refrigerator: "Just because it rhymes doesn't mean it's a good idea." I suppose that could be called the fallacy of endings.
There's also a fallacy of alliteration, which claims that if the beginnings of words are the same they must be related.
When I was a child my mother and father took me to hear revivalist Dr. Harvey Springer at a tent meeting outside Jackson, MI. I write about it in my upcoming book about growing up in America's Heartland as a Christian.
Springer used both of the above analogies to claim that Communism and Catholicism were one in the same because they both started with C's, ended with "ism's," and Nikita Khrushchev, the Soviet Premiere, and Pope Paul John XXIII were intent on taking over the world, one by our death, and one by us having more babies. In the middle of his hell-fire and brimstone sermon he draped a communist flag over two good looking, straight cut kids from the saw-dust audience and proclaimed in a roar that THIS is what would happen if America elected John. F. Kennedy (a Catholic) president of the United States.
These were Faulty Analogies, and unfortunately they are used every day to discredit what is true because the truth demands obedience.
This is where atheism comes in. Yes, it ends with an "ism" so it must also be a cult, or so my mother would say.
Atheism makes the declarative statement that there is no God because his existence is not visible in the observable and knowable universe with our physical senses. This is also a faulty analogy because it assumes that what is knowable must stimulate our physical senses in a direct way like a hug from mama as she smothers us in her bosom. The atheist claims, if it can't be touched, smelled, tasted or seen, then it doesn't exist.
Logically, the atheist doesn't have physical evidence that he or she has experience first hand for 95% of what they believe in. Oh, they see signs and representations of Pluto, and the Higg's Bosn, and they psychologically "feel" guilt…but they're virtually ignorant of such a thing's existence in the same way they demand evidence for God. I would argue that we have myriad of physical evidence that we touch, smell, taste, see and hear that cannot be explained outside a benevolent, intelligence force.
You must also consider that the atheist's body of knowledge in regard to the universe is a minute fraction of a decimal point of a percentage of what the universe it. A single man's knowledge is smaller than one can imagine, just the way our giant Earth is a spec on a spec, of a spec within a galaxy. So, in context, how can anyone argue logically that they are omniscient enough to declare "there is no God?"
They can't, and…
…that's why I'm Catholic.
May the Lord Be With You.
Stanley D. Williams, Ph.D.
Editorial at Nineveh's Crossing.com
