How to Ask Questions That Reveal the Heart of a Matter

While foraging for its colony one day, an ant heard a strained sort of squeaking sound emanating from the nearby moss. The ant skittered over to investigate, only to find a tiny flightless beetle pushing with all its might against a stout twig that rose from the ground.

“What are you doing, there?” asked the ant.

“This wood is an eyesore,” the beetle replied, panting. “And wood is far less pleasant to walk across than moss. I’ve made it my mission to remove all the wood from this entire area, to create a more comfortable world.”

The ant made no response for a moment, except for a twitch of its antennae. Then, motioning for the beetle to move a step to the left, the ant bent down its pincers and gently peeled back the moss on which the beetle had been standing.

“Is that . . . ” the beetle hesitated.

“Yep,” the ant responded. “I hate to break it to you, but this entire area is made of wood. You live on a fallen log, most of which is floating over a lake. The twig you’re fighting is part of the log which has kept you afloat all this time.”

Peeling Back the Surface Issues

Like a beetle out to fight the very substance holding up its world, many arguments against the Bible depend on principles that a biblical worldview supplies. As Part 1 of this article discussed, these principles include truth, logic, knowledge, science, morality, and human value. Arguments that borrow biblical principles to try criticizing the Bible involve logical errors called stolen concept fallacies. How can we, like the ant, gently “peel back” the surface issues of such arguments to reveal the stolen principles beneath?

A helpful way to start is asking why an argument’s topic is worth raising in the first place. This question, in turn, often leads to other “big picture” questions. To illustrate, here’s how big picture questions can identify the stolen concepts in three common objections to Christianity.

Objection #1: Old Testament Warfare

Have you ever come across arguments that object to the Bible because of warfare and violence in the Old Testament? To reveal the biblical principles behind these arguments, we can first ask, “Why do we care about warfare?”

In answer, we care because war involves the destruction of human life. But why do we care about human life? We care because human life is valuable. But why does every human life possess intrinsic value? A biblical worldview—not an evolutionary one—answers that.

The value of human life is a stolen concept, and so is any moral objection to violence. After all, no form of violence would be objectively wrong if objective moral standards didn’t exist. Naturalistic worldviews do not provide a foundation for such standards. But a biblical worldview does, revealing that morality rests in God’s unchanging character.1

Objection #2: Hypocrisy Among Professing Christians

As another example, some arguments imply that Christianity isn’t worth believing because professing Christians have committed wrongdoings in the past or because hypocrisy still exists within the church. We can identify these arguments’ stolen concepts by asking, “Why are we concerned about professing Christians’ past or present wrongdoings?” We’re concerned about wrongdoings because they’re, well, wrong!

Again, where do moral standards for determining “wrong” originate? A biblical worldview supplies the foundation for those standards, revealing that wrongdoing and hypocrisy are immoral because they run contrary to God’s character. That’s why Jesus himself could rightly and rationally criticize religious hypocrisy.2

Objection #3: Science and the Bible

How about this type of argument? “The Bible is wrong because science has shown we descended from ape-like ancestors (hominids), not from a literal Adam.”

As with the other objections above, fully responding to this argument would require multiple steps. For instance, we’d want to show the difference between observational and historical science3 by applying Critical Thinking Check #4, Check the Definitions, to the term science. We could also apply Check #6, Check the Interpretations, to separate facts from assumptions regarding “hominid” fossils. Then, we could apply Check #7, Check the Logic, to reveal the either-or fallacies in claims that try pitting “science” against “faith.”

Even before these steps, however, we could identify stolen concepts in the argument by asking, “Why do we care what ‘science’ supposedly shows?” We care because scientific reasoning is a means of (hopefully) determining truth. But how do we know that truth exists and is determinable? Why do the principles behind scientific reasoning work? How can we be certain that our senses and logical faculties are trustworthy or that we live in an orderly universe that operates under laws of logic? For that matter, how can we be certain of anything? Like Part 1 of this article examined, the consistent basis for principles of truth, logic, knowledge, and science rest in a biblical worldview, not a naturalistic evolutionary one.4

Revealing a Firm Foundation

As these examples illustrate, big picture questions make effective tools for peeling back the “moss” of surface issues to reveal the biblical principles beneath. Asking big-picture questions lets us identify stolen concept fallacies in arguments that try to dispute the Bible by relying on biblical principles. But more importantly, big-picture questions also help us point others to the hope and truth of God’s Word—and to Jesus, who is truth.

For more information

Truth:
Relative Thinking—A Life Without Moorings and Meaning
Inerrancy and the Test of Truth
False Teaching Lie #3: Truth Is Up to You

Logic:
Atheism: An Irrational Worldview
A Reader Challenges Our Claim About a Logical, God-Created Universe
Is the Christian Worldview Logical?

Knowledge and scientific reasoning:
Atheism: The Weakest of Worldviews
Biblical Faith Is Not “Blind”—It’s Supported by Good Science
Science and the Bible: Should There Be a Conflict?

Morality:
Do Secularists Have a Foundation for Morality?
Morality and the Irrationality of an Evolutionary Worldview
Is Morality Determined by Its Popularity?

Human value:
God’s Image: The Difference-Maker
Are Humans Animals? Q&A
Sanctity of Life Q&A