Not Sound Logic?

Hello,

I normally enjoy Answers In Genesis, and I definitely appreciate your ministry. However, I do have one pet peeve. From the latest feedback:

“Logic, truth, morality, knowledge, and science all stem from a biblical worldview, and only a biblical worldview. This does not mean that one must believe the Bible in order to believe in these things, but it does mean that the Bible must be true in order for one to use these things.”

This just doesn't make sense, and frankly, it makes us look bad. Specifically, I have a problem with saying:

“the Bible must be true in order for one to use these things.”

No! This is not sound logic. One can easily concoct some other justification for “Logic, truth, morality, [and] knowledge” that contradicts at least some aspect of the Bible. Even though evolutionists cannot justify these things purely through the study of evolution, it does not follow that “the Bible must be true”.

I could say much more, but for the 1000 character limit. God bless.

—E.P.

Hello,

I normally enjoy Answers In Genesis, and I definitely appreciate your ministry.

Thanks for the encouragement.

However, I do have one pet peeve. From the latest feedback:

“Logic, truth, morality, knowledge, and science all stem from a biblical worldview, and only a biblical worldview. This does not mean that one must believe the Bible in order to believe in these things, but it does mean that the Bible must be true in order for one to use these things.”

Pastor Chaffey was exactly right; none of these things have rational justification apart from the biblical worldview. God Himself has indicated in His Word that knowledge begins with Him (Proverbs 1:7) and is not possible apart from Him (Colossians 2:3).

This just doesn't make sense,

We have a number of articles (such as Atheism: An Irrational Worldview) and a book (The Ultimate Proof of Creation) on this topic that might help you to understand it better.

and frankly, it makes us look bad.

We shouldn’t really be too concerned about “looking bad” to the world. Rather we should be concerned about teaching what is true, and acting in obedience to the Word of God. Besides, to date, no evolutionist has been able to refute this argument. They can mock all they want. But they cannot argue against the biblical worldview.

Specifically, I have a problem with saying:

“the Bible must be true in order for one to use these things.”

No! This is not sound logic.

Actually, it is sound. It is valid (the form of the argument is correct—usually phrased as a modus tollens), and the premises are true. 1. If the Bible were not true, logic would not be meaningful. 2. Logic is meaningful. 3. Therefore, the Bible is true. The first premise is usually further defended by illustrations of the impossibility of the contrary.

One can easily concoct some other justification for “Logic, truth, morality, [and] knowledge” that contradicts at least some aspect of the Bible.

No. One cannot. Secular philosophers have been attempting this for thousands of years, and no one has succeeded. No one can come up with rational justification for why there would be universal abstract invariant exceptionless laws such as laws of logic, nor why the universe should obey them, nor why the human mind somehow knows about them. Likewise, science relies upon induction, which can only be justified in a Christian worldview: see Evolution: The Anti-Science. It may interest you to know that the philosopher David Hume was absolutely stumped by the question of how to account for induction (and thus science) in a secular worldview.

Even though evolutionists cannot justify these things purely through the study of evolution, it does not follow that “the Bible must be true”.

Evolutionists cannot rationally account for these things in any way whatsoever. The only solution is to appeal to the biblical worldview—which denies molecules-to-man evolution.

I could say much more, but for the 1000 character limit. God bless.

Follow-up messages are welcome. But please do read some of the resources on this, so that we don’t have to repeat too much of what we’ve already written. I hope this brief reply is helpful. God bless.

—Dr. Jason Lisle