Announcement

Collapse

Deeper Waters Forum Guidelines

Notice Ė The ministries featured in this section of TheologyWeb are guests of this site and in some cases not bargaining for the rough and tumble world of debate forums, though sometimes they are. Additionally, this area is frequented and highlighted for guests who also very often are not acclimated to debate fora. As such, the rules of conduct here will be more strict than in the general forum. This will be something within the discretion of the Moderators and the Ministry Representative, but we simply ask that you conduct yourselves in a manner considerate of the fact that these ministries are our invited guests. You can always feel free to start a related thread in general forum without such extra restrictions. Thank you.

Deeper Waters is founded on the belief that the Christian community has long been in the shallow end of Christianity while there are treasures of the deep waiting to be discovered. Too many in the shallow end are not prepared when they go out beyond those waters and are quickly devoured by sharks. We wish to aid Christians to equip them to navigate the deeper waters of the ocean of truth and come up with treasure in the end.

We also wish to give special aid to those often neglected, that is, the disabled community. This is especially so since our founders are both on the autism spectrum and have a special desire to reach those on that spectrum. While they are a special emphasis, we seek to help others with any disability realize that God can use them and that they are as the Psalmist says, fearfully and wonderfully made.

General TheologyWeb forum rules: here.
See more
See less

Why The Genetic Fallacy Matters

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why The Genetic Fallacy Matters

    If you want to argue, argue well.

    Link

    ------

    Does where that idea came from matter? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

    On Facebook in the span of 24 hours, I have seen two posts arguing against evolution making the exact same mistake. The first one was claiming that Darwin was a member of a Masonic lodge and was involved with Luciferian practices. The other one was claiming that evolution was used in the history of racism. Now you should know that my stance is to neither argue for or against evolution. I’m not a scientist. However, I am opposed to bad arguments. That includes bad arguments against positions I oppose, such as when I have worked to take to task conservative memes against liberals here that are based on falsehoods.

    This is simply called the genetic fallacy. It says nothing about the position itself. Let’s suppose that Adam Smith, who is considered the father of capitalism, was a colossal jerk to everyone he met. That would not change anything about capitalism whatsoever. I have a friend who considers Marx the most wicked man who ever lived. Even if that is true, that says nothing about Communism being true or false.

    Now with the claims we have here, I am extremely skeptical of the former claim, but I am open to the latter. I have seen some writings that lead me to think that there was some racism involved in Darwin. There are some people who also think this was involved in the holocaust of Hitler. That is a question for historians of science and World War II to discuss. For the worst case scenario, I will grant that these claims are true.

    None of this says anything about evolution being true or false. It makes no difference. If you are a Christian sharing these arguments, you are not doing our side any favors whatsoever. If anything, you are further embarrassing us. I don’t doubt you mean well. I don’t doubt you do this out of zeal for Christ. However, Paul warned us in Romans about a zeal that is not in accordance with knowledge.

    If you want to argue against evolution, and I have no problem if you do because if it can be shown to be bad science, we should reject it, then you are going to have to argue against it on scientific grounds. Let’s consider some parallels in our own field of interest.

    I am not a KJV-onlyist, but I have heard claims before that King James who was behind the KJV was a homosexual known as a flaming queen. Let’s suppose that was true. What does that say about evolution? Absolutely nothing. The KJV will have to be critiqued on the grounds of the translation.

    Recently, we have had the Ravi Zacharias scandal break out. I understand people not wanting to use Ravi’s material and books anymore. That is a matter of wisdom. That being said, let’s consider the arguments. Are they false because Ravi turned out to be a pervert? Not at all.

    I consider myself to be a Thomist and a Protestant. Are you going to refute Thomism by telling me that he was a Roman Catholic? Not a bit. Is Aristotle disproven just because he didn’t use the Bible? Not at all.

    Mark is portrayed in Acts as a Momma’s Boy who left the team of Paul and Barnabas early and caused a division between the church’s two first great missionaries. Does this mean his Gospel is not reliable? Not a bit.

    The only time pointing to the character of the person matters is if the claim is centered around the reputation of the person involved. If a person is testifying to something in a court of law that they have seen and it can be shown that the person is a compulsive liar, for example, then you have grounds to doubt their testimony. Outside of that, none whatsoever.

    As I said each time this came up, let’s suppose Robert Oppenheimer, the father of the atomic bomb, was a complete jerk. Let’s suppose he was a satanist who molested children and ate cats for breakfast. None of this is true, of course. However, if it was, it would not make a difference to the residents of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The bombs still worked regardless of his character.

    Please don’t make embarrassing arguments. They’re not worthy of Jesus.

    In Christ,
    Nick Peters
    (And I affirm the virgin birth)

  • #2
    I posted something yesterday about this. Tell me what you think

    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    This goes directly to one of the ways I meant "It is a difference between the secular world and the religious one." To clarify, take for example, science. It really does not matter if the person who makes a discovery or postulates a theory is a cannibalistic puppy-rapist who poisoned town wells for kicks. The only thing that matters is whether or not their discovery is valid and holds up to scrutiny. In religion the man and the message are more intertwined. If you're asking folks to follow you, to trust you to help shepherd them, you better be able to show that you're a good and upright shepherd, not merely that you know how to do it.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

    Comment


    • #3
      I have noticed that certain ardent KJV only proponents (who like to traffic in the genetic fallacy in attacking other translations) spend considerable energy trying to refute the claims about King James I. This suggests that they find such arguments compelling. All they should have to do is say "so what?"
      "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        I posted something yesterday about this. Tell me what you think

        Yep. It's valid to question Mormonism and Islam when you look at their founders.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
          I have noticed that certain ardent KJV only proponents (who like to traffic in the genetic fallacy in attacking other translations) spend considerable energy trying to refute the claims about King James I. This suggests that they find such arguments compelling. All they should have to do is say "so what?"
          Agreed

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post

            Yep. It's valid to question Mormonism and Islam when you look at their founders.
            Only because Joseph Smith & Muhammad are part of the message. By contrast, the shortcomings of the Reformers, however deplorable, are irrelevant to the validity of Protestantism.
            Though, it is true that there is a connection between personal character, and one's ability to perceive what is good. But one cannot leave out the totally unguessable part played by God's grace.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Rushing Jaws View Post
              Only because Joseph Smith & Muhammad are part of the message. By contrast, the shortcomings of the Reformers, however deplorable, are irrelevant to the validity of Protestantism.
              Though, it is true that there is a connection between personal character, and one's ability to perceive what is good. But one cannot leave out the totally unguessable part played by God's grace.
              Philippians 1:18 then.

              I'm always still in trouble again

              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

              Comment


              • #8
                I do think it is important to look at the origins of ideas, but at the same in terms of balance a cumulative case needs to be built to look at the evidence both for and against the position.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ReformedApologist View Post
                  I do think it is important to look at the origins of ideas, but at the same in terms of balance a cumulative case needs to be built to look at the evidence both for and against the position.
                  The example of Mormonism came up earlier. I think it's fair to mention Joseph Smith's history of dishonesty along the lines of the eyewitness testimony example Nick mentioned, though it shouldn't be the only evidence marshalled against Mormonism (and plenty of good evidence exist to disprove it). After all, as Glenn Miller wrote somewhere on his site, Jesus wants us to use his revealed character in the gospels to judge his message. Along the same lines, if someone is evaluating both sides, it's reasonable to look at Smith and ask if he is the type of man that seems credible.

                  Something like evolution can be more independently verified apart from the writings of one or two people. Even if for the sake of argument Charles Darwin was a serial liar, the field of study has significantly, er, evolved since then.
                  Last edited by KingsGambit; 06-20-2021, 11:59 PM.
                  "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                  Comment

                  Related Threads

                  Collapse

                  Topics Statistics Last Post
                  Started by Apologiaphoenix, Yesterday, 08:43 AM
                  0 responses
                  13 views
                  0 likes
                  Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                  Started by Apologiaphoenix, 07-22-2021, 08:51 AM
                  2 responses
                  37 views
                  0 likes
                  Last Post rogue06
                  by rogue06
                   
                  Started by Apologiaphoenix, 07-21-2021, 10:52 AM
                  2 responses
                  27 views
                  0 likes
                  Last Post Cow Poke  
                  Started by Apologiaphoenix, 07-20-2021, 08:15 AM
                  1 response
                  16 views
                  0 likes
                  Last Post Sparko
                  by Sparko
                   
                  Started by Apologiaphoenix, 07-19-2021, 09:23 AM
                  30 responses
                  220 views
                  0 likes
                  Last Post KingsGambit  
                  Working...
                  X