There are silly arguments and then there are silly arguments. Here is a classic example of a false analogy:
With the passage of time, it seems that Rick Warren seems to grow
further and further into first heteroorthodoxy , then unorthodoxy, then
heresy and now rank compromise and apostasy, topping his actions up
with his appearance at the World Economic Forum Interfaith session at Davos, Switzerland.
Yet Warren apologists such as Richard Abanes have continued their
untenable position that Rick Warren is orthodox. It is to this effect
that it would be good to present one short logical deductive argument
which proves once and for all Warren's apostasy and denial of the
Gospel. Since this is a deductiveargument, it is irrefutable if the premises are true and the logical argumentation is valid. And therefore, this is a concrete case against Rick Warren. See Logical Deductive argument for Rick Warren's compromise and denial of the Gospel
3 comments:
Hi Ron,
I appreciate your link, but I am seriously perplexed.
How is Daniel's article "silly"? How is it a false analogy?
Do you care to show us the errors? Or is it merely a bare assertion?
Kind regards,
Vincent
I don't have the time to get into the nuts and bolts but the analogy falls apart with the blanket statement that Catholics are all false and deny the true gospel.
That is beyond a broad brush and begins to intimate that you are coming from a particular eschatology especially concerning the so called apostasy coming in the last days which would be Catholicism.
To equates Warrens position that Catholics can be brothers and sisters in Christ then say this: "And with this we finish our logical flow of argumentation with the conclusion that Rick Warren is a heretic and an apostate (for this is an appropriate description for someone who willingly and knowingly repudiates the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, repeatedly). The case is seen to be water-tight and the argument sound since this is a deductive argument whereby all the premises are true, and the argument flow is valid (the conclusions flow from the premises). May God use this to open up the eyes of Christians around the world, for His Name's sake. Amen."
Again w/o delving too far in to the theological underpinnings that is beyond an arrogant thing to say. The argumentation is built upon your understanding of cause and effect that is simply not there.
Before you call someone an apostate (and sending them to hell) you should re-evaluate your own motivations for this un christian like diatribe.
dear Ron,
I believe only God can send "anyone" to hell.:P
I am curious: what do you understand of the Gospel as taught by the Catechism of the Catholic Church?
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM
Do you think it is the same gospel taught by evangelicals?
What does Paul say in Galatians 1:8-9?
Post a Comment