The Fallacy of the Assumed Premise

(reliquum) #21

Is it possible, to contain the sin infection/epidemic, he placed a moratorium on creation?
Imagine, loving to create and loving what he creates-with an infinity to fill-and infinity to fill it-and to be constrained from it. Begs other questions as well…

(Robert Lindbeck) #22

It is interesting that Creation is brought up in the thread about The Fallacy of the Assumed Premise. With a six thousand year timeline we see many discrepancies and we assume a next day fall. In reality we have no clue how much time elapsed from Creation to the fall. It could have been one day, it could have been one year, it could have been one million years. A theory of 6,000 years of history assumes nothing happened outside of the 6,000 years. The time frame from Creation to Fall is not recorded because it is not a key fact.


This is intriguing to think about. If it were necessary to our salvation, God would have revealed it. However, God gave us brains to think critically.

(reliquum) #24

A God unconstrained by time or space, how long would he sit at the end of the cosmic driveway, waiting for his first lost son to return? Can you hear the hound of heaven, calling, Lucifer, where are you?


‘The Fallacy of the Assumed Premise’.
The title of the essay got me thinking about the words chosen and a broader application of them.
Here is another, more awkward way to state it:
A mistaken conclusion supposedly true but really without proof, based on an unsound argument or failure in reasoning.

In a prior comment on this thread, Lindy said that creation could not be recent because we see light from stars hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of light years away. The conclusion which follows is that for light to travel such distance, the universe must be very old. Lindy is making an assumption: that God did not or could not create a universe already in operation or equilibrium. Is this a faulty assumption leading to an errant conclusion? I don’t know but scientists have shown that particles can mysteriously interact with each other instantaneously, i.e., the speed of light may not be the constraint we have assumed it to be.

It seems to me we limit God in our thinking all the time, yet Scripture says in several places ‘Is anything too hard for the Lord?’.

When I read other ideas about God and Christianity, I realize that every attempt at explaining God (theology) has its own set of assumptions and therefore conclusions, Adventism being no exception. If we never study other theologies, it is difficult to see the suppositions supporting our own view and come to realize that others have reasons for rejecting them. It can be harder to see that some of our assumed premises may be fallacious. Thus we can become trapped by our religion.

Also, I think it’s difficult for us to gain a clear picture of God because our fallen, finite minds can’t grasp ideas like omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence and what we might call ‘omniwisdom’.

To me, the most tragic part is that virtually every theology falls short and we all seem to struggle mightly to appreciate the very essence of God, that is, that God is love. Our challenge is to see His self-emptying love for us, His agape, or what might be called His ‘omnilove’.

(Steve Mga) #26

With all of our massive ways to understand the universe from the Stars, planets, down
to the Earth itself [land and seas], further down to particles in the atoms, we are NO
BETTER KNOWLEDGEABLE about God now than when the ancients were and wrote
about God from Genesis to Judges, the Psalms, Isaiah, and the other prophets.
Even our ability to understand “what is life?” is very limited. We have no idea as to WHAT
starts the “life” process. And in some respects, WHAT ends the “life” process in an organism.

And Yet, Human Being feel very BOASTFUL about having ONLY 28 statements that HAVE
to be believed about God, the Universe, and something called “Salvation”, and IF one DOES
NOT AGREE with them, then one is NOT a TRUE Christian, a part of the TRUE Remnant [as
if a group can tell WHAT Remnant in God’s timing is].
Poets from the 1500’s were writing songs about Christ’s coming, and became more prolific in
the 1600’s about this “coming” and “near” event. Did THEY assume THEY were the Remnant?

(Robert Lindbeck) #27

Lucky (God’s graciousness), we have eternity to grasp a small portion of what a great loving God He/She is.


@niteguy2, @robelle,
I think we confuse our greater, modern, scientific ability to measure and describe things more fully with our still very poor achievements at really explaining things - hence the ‘God particle’.
In fact, it seems to me that the further we probe with our scientific instruments the more mysterious the things are that we encounter.

(Alice C ) #29

Maybe. But it is also possible that Satan was confined to this earth at some point. In Job 1, he was “walking to and fro across the earth.” In ancient times, when property was sold the buyer claimed it by walking around on it. Later, just setting a foot on it claimed it. Later still, handing over a sandal was enough. See Ruth 4. So Satan was telling God that the earth was his; God disagreed. And, of course, Satan tempted Christ in the same way–worship me–acknowledge me as the ruler of the earth.

(Alice C ) #30

I appreciate the thoughts that we have no idea what God is capable of, how much He created when, and how difficult it is to set any kind of timeline. As God, if he wanted to make the entire universe at once, He certainly could. And/or He could make anything any age He wanted to. Adam and Eve were adults; the trees and plants were mature; the chicken did apparently come before the egg. There is so much we have no way of knowing, except that God is all-wise, all-powerful, all-knowing, all-present, maybe even in time as well as space. We will be surprised by many things in heaven and in the new earth. Or, He could continue to create for all eternity. We have eternity to study it.

(Steve Mga) #31

Alice –
On day 3, God said, Let the Earth bring forth!
Have you walked down city streets. There will be a tiny bit of dirt along the curb.
There is something growing in it.
Walking in parking lots where the asphalt is cracked and a thimble full of dirt is in
the cracks. Something is growing.
Yes! God is STILL Creating!
The Earth is STILL obeying His original command.

(Alice C ) #32

Absolutely true.God sustains and creates.

(reliquum) #33

Adds a graphic image to “all creation (perhaps even that waiting to be) groans”.

I wonder if cancer itself might as duly represent a thwarted creation as evolution.
Life force is eternal, inexorable, always seeking the garden.
Creation, recreation, procreation (itself the first palpable parable, a “real metaphor” of God’s desire for His bride) all point to a pregnant, regnant God who desires only that the creation he loves will carry out his will.

I can almost hear the heavenly edict-go “multiply”, fill my eternity, till infinity spills over!
Then we’ll make more!

(Leandro) #34

Lyndy, believing does not require proving. If I will not believe that creation happened in just 6 days, I will not believe many things in the bible: Manna from the sky is not true.,Aaron’s rod budded not true, Jesus made a brand new eye for the blind out of the dust not true, and resurrection of the dead not true,because I can not prove those.
There is an infinite volume of information we do not know about GOD. Be careful on looking at the stars (GOD told us not to) because we may not find the answers there. I think there is so much we don’t know about light. Scientists cannot even decide if its a particle or a wave. It is affected by gravity so its a particle but does not have mass. And when it bends, it behaves like a wave. Light year as a measure of distance will someday be rejected by astronomers. The room for error in using it is as vast as the universe (according to my common sense).The scientists assumed that because they have determined that the speed of light (186,000 miles/s), was determined in a vacuum, it will be safe to use. I have a feeling that the speed of light is not that constant in the outer space. The vacuum we know here might not be the same vacuum out there. Besides, are so much variables to consider out there. What about Dark Matter which, accordingly is invisible but packs unimaginable force? What about Dark Energy’s force that causes the universe to expand? What about the effect of an intermediate planet’s gravity? And if the universe is expanding (in 3 dimension) how sure is the 90% accuracy of the scientists’ measurements of the distances? And those are the variables known yet.

(Ikswezdyr) #35

There are many facets of the seventh-day Sabbath to cherish and enrich its meaning, and this is one of them. But keeping a day will not save anyone, and the SDA church has presented it as a kind of salvation. Our leaders would not admit this, but this is the emphasis of Sabbath in the last day. I believe it is wrong. The three angels’ messages are a primary part of Revelation, and creation is the first facet. However, the Sabbath is a symbol of rest in Christ from our works to be saved. This is the most important reason for Sabbath–rest in Christ. Without His rest of righteousness by faith we can’t appreciate others or love them. It is the key to Sabbath. The Jews rejected Christ and His righteousness and thus their Sabbath became meaningless. We celebrate Christ in the Sabbath–nothing else. If this were presented to the Christian world, we would not be seen as legalists.

(Robert Lindbeck) #36

THe more we “learn”, the more we realize there is to learn.

(reliquum) #37

Difference between the two, knowledge will fill you up with all the “answers”; wisdom will give you better questions.

(Leandro) #38

We know that Adam lived 930 years. The fall happened before Seth was born. That will give us not a big number in terms of years.

(Matt) #39

Radio carbon dating is just one of many types of radiometric dating, each have their own specific applications, and yes, scientists have known for a very long time that the environment of earth has changed drastically throughout its long history. In certain environments, especially, this can create sampling errors. But these problems are well-known and studied, and scientists avoid using carbon dating in those cases. For instance, the marine effect is known to make recently dead or even still living marine organisms appear to be 1,000 years old! These examples are trotted out as if they disprove radiocarbon dating. Instead it demonstrates that scientists understand the limitations and applications of these dating technologies. The fact that young earthers trot out carbon dating as the radiometric technique to criticize tells me that they don’t really understand how any of these methods work. Carbon dating is only applicable to relatively short timescales, and only to samples that still have carbon! It is NOT used to give us the age of the earth. We can be confident about the long age of the earth for many other converging reasons.

The most important geologic clock is probably uranium-lead dating. This method of dating relies on zircons, tiny crystals formed by volcanic activity. Because of the way zircons form, it’s impossible for them to contain lead. However, these little crystals of oxygen, silica and zirconium sometimes contain trace amounts of uranium. Uranium decays at a 100% predictable rate. Because zircons never contain lead during formation, they are perfect little geologic clocks. Regardless of the environmental conditions of the time or other factors, we can measure the age of these crystals by measuring the amount of lead, which can only have come from the radioactive decay of uranium.

The fossil record itself points clearly to deep time, and is inconsistent with a single cataclysmic flood event. Instead, we see records of many, many geologic cataclysms of various scales throughout history. We see divergent environments (desert, shallow tropical sea, dense forest) all stacked on top of one another. Each with it’s own set of animals adapted to live in that environment. It is inconceivable to me how such diverse ecosystems could be laid down so orderly, one on top of the other, in 6,000 years. The amount of biomass required to create the currently estimated amount of coal alone appears mathematically impossible on such a short timetable.

Age is everywhere we look in geology. And when I talk to geologists this is completely uncontroversial, even among Christians! On the other side, I see stuff like the “article” links you and @leandro have provided. It doesn’t take a lot of skepticism to see the level of expertise on those websites. Why is it that subject-matter-experts overwhelmingly reject the idea of a young earth? As I see it, there are only four explanations for this.

  1. Scientists (including the majority of Christians in the field of geology) are engaged in a global conspiracy to deceive the public about the age of the earth for unknown reasons (perhaps to sway people to Satan or something?)

  2. Scientists are completely inept, they simply don’t know what they’re talking about, and the methods of science shouldn’t be trusted. If this is the case we should probably also reject most of modern technology and life. Because most of the rest of science seems pretty useful…

  3. Scientists are being misled by the Devil or some malevolent force we can’t detect. Their minds are being manipulated such that they believe there is evidence for an old earth, but they are wrong. If this is the case we can pretty much throw all of observable reality out the window and throw up our hands. If our minds can be manipulated like this, then we have no rational ability to trust our senses, or any deity that would allow such manipulation to take place!

  4. Or, the scientists understand something which you do not.

Using Occam’s Razor, I think number four seems overwhelmingly the most likely.


Careful, now, be nice… just sharing other Topic resources.
Moving ahead… many thanks for providing the interesting analysis! Very helpful orientation.