Welcome back to Defenders Voice. This is Dr.Paul. Thank you for joining us today. Please visit us at www.doctorpaul.org to subscribe to our podcast. Defender’s voice is about developing a Christian view of the world. We talk about the current state of Christian church, politics, history, philosophy, atheism and medicine etc. I started this channel to have a discussion on current topics. So, feel free to send me your questions to firstname.lastname@example.org. We will discuss those topics.
Today’s question: I am an atheist. Josh Duggar, the great Christian star, is awaiting trial for crimes. What is your response? Are you going to commit True Scotman’s fallacy?
Very good question. Former 19 and counting star Josh Duggar is in the news again. Is there any sin he did not commit? Incest, rape, pornography, adultery? He abused his sisters. He subscribed to Ashley Madison. He cheated on his wife. He watched pornography. Now, the most heinous of all is watching movies in which little children are violated.
You see sin cannot be tamed. Sin has only slaves, no masters. We often think we can master sin. No, that is not possible. Jesus Christ, our Lord, said, Everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin.(John 8:32).
As you sin more, you will be more bound to it. You won’t stop with softporn. You will go into hardcore stuff. Even that will not satisfy you. You will crave for more explicit material. Why do you think movies which violate children are exploding all around us? Most people do not start there. They start with softporn and go deeper and deeper into it. Hell is a bottomless pit. You will never reach its bottom.
I have some patients struggling with opioid addiction. They told me, ‘It’s never enough. I needed more and more to satisfy the cravings.’ I prescribed them suboxone. It is also known as buprenorphine. I ask them after a few weeks, ‘How are you doing?’. They say, ‘I am doing great. I no longer have any cravings for opioids. Thanks for prescribing this medication. Now I am no longer in the street for drugs. I can focus on my family and my job’. What happened? This medication suboxone goes into their brain and occupies the mu receptors which are also the targets of opioids. We are substituting one drug with another drug. The receptors in the brain are now occupied by a clean medication rather than by all unclean drugs in the street.
Something similar happens in the spiritual realm. Either Satan occupies your mind or God. It cannot be both. The receptors in your mind should be occupied by divine pleasures rather than carnal pleasures. There is a greater joy in fellowship with God than in sin. So, we should not substitute fellowship with God with watching pornography.
Josh Duggar obviously is not spending time in the fellowship and fear of God. When Romans and Greeks ruled this world, you could have a physical relationship with a minor. No one would bat an eyelid. The Greeks said that was part of growing up. That was part of reaching maturity. Christians came and turned it into a sin. Even watching a minor getting violated is a crime, punishable up to 20 years in prison. That is a legacy of our Christian heritage. As the West becomes Post-Christian, we have more voices calling for the normalization of relationships with minors. As our society becomes Post-Christian, all that Pre-Christian garbage will return and get normalized.
Now, atheists say the Josh Duggar case proves Christianity is false. It does not. As I said before, it is Christianity which turned it into a sin and a crime. In atheism, you are just watching a movie. There is no such thing as sin in that worldview.
When we say, ‘Josh Duggar is not a true Christian’, atheists complain, ‘Hey, that is a No true Scotsman fallacy.’ First of all, what in the world is this ‘No true Scotsman fallacy’? This fallacy was developed by an English philosopher, Antony Flew (1923-2010). The classic example goes like this:
Person A: “No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.”
Person B: “But my uncle Angus is a Scotsman and he puts sugar on his porridge.”
Person A: “But no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.”
The Scotsman sits on the porch and reads the newspaper while sipping Scottish tea. He reads, ‘a man killed his neighbor in Aberdeen’. He says, ‘that can’t be. No true Scotsman kills his neighbor’. Next week he reads another story in the newspaper, ‘a man robbed the bank in Glasgow’. He says, ‘that can’t be. No true Scotsman robs a bank’. Following week he reads another story in the newspaper, ‘a man rapes in Edinburgh’. He says, ‘that can’t be. No true Scotsman rapes others’. Basically it is non-falsifiable.
Now, atheists say we commit the same ‘No true Scotsman fallacy’ with Christianity.
‘Josh Duggar abused his sisters. He says he is a Christian.’
We say, ‘he can’t be a Christian. No true Christian abuses his sisters’
‘Josh Duggar cheated on his wife. He says he is a Christian’
We say, ‘He can’t be a Christian. No true Christian cheats on his spouse’
‘Josh Duggar possessed movies depicting children. He says he is a Christian’
We say, ‘He can’t be a Christian. No true Christian downloads such movies’
Atheists say, ‘it’s frustrating, man. It is ‘No true Scotsman fallacy’. Christianity is non-falsifiable.
Now, let me explain why you can’t throw that argument on Christianity.
When there are established definitions for a group, this fallacy does not apply
I said, a heliocentrist should not believe that sun rotates around the earth
You said, I have a friend who is a heliocentrist and he believes that sun rotates around the earth
I said, no true heliocentrist should believe that sun rotates around the earth
That is not a true Scotsman fallacy. Because there is a clear cut definition for heliocentrist, which is you must believe that the earth rotates around the sun
Jesus said in John 5:44-45
But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven.
Jesus is commanding here: Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, so good to them that hate you.
If I say, a Christian should not hate people.
You say, I know a Christian who hates people.
Then I say, a true Christian should not hate people.
That is not a ‘No true Scotsman fallacy’ because Jesus clearly commanded his followers to love their enemies.
In Matthew 19:14, Jesus said,
Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
If you want to belong to the kingdom of heaven, you should be pure like a child. If you are watching movies which violate little children, then you do not belong to the kingdom of heaven. So, to say that a true Christian should not download such videos is not a no true Scotsman fallacy.
When there are established patterns of behavior, this fallacy does not apply.
If I say, A follower of Martin Luther King Jr should not be a racist.
You say, I know someone who claims to be the follower of Martin Luther King Jr and he is a racist.
I say, a true follower of Martin Luther King Jr cannot be a racist.
That is not a No true Scotsman fallacy because Martin Luther King Jr had an established pattern of behavior against racism. He fought against racism and preached against racism. A true follower of MLK Jr should not be a racist. That is not NTS fallacy.
I say, a Christian should not be an Anti-Semite
You say, I know a ton of Christians who are Anti-Semites
I say, a true Christian should not be an Anti-Semite
That is not an NTS fallacy because Jesus was a Jewish gentleman, who loved and served Jewish people.
I say, a Gandhian cannot be violent
You say, I know a Gandhian who is violent
I say, a true Gandhian cannot be violent
That is not a NTS fallacy because Gandhi throughout his life established a pattern of non-violent behavior. He actively taught non-violence to his followers and was killed as a martyr. Similarly, Jesus established a pattern of non-violent behavior and was killed as a martyr. So, statements like ‘a true Gandhian cannot be violent’, ‘a true Christian. cannot be violent’ are not NTS fallacy.
So, no true Scotsman fallacy is not applicable to Christianity. No one ever defined objectively what makes a true Scotsman. No one ever established objectively how a true Scotsman should behave. But, Jesus Christ our Lord, the founder of our religion defined objectively what makes a true Christian. He established objectively how a true Christian should behave.
In his Second inaugural address, Abraham Lincoln said, ‘Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered.’
Pro- slavery and Anti-slavery: both were claiming God is on their side. Lincoln told them, the prayers of both could not be answered because God has objective values. No one ever defined objective values for Scottishness, but Jesus Christ had defined objective values for a Christian. So, no true Scotsman fallacy does not apply to Christian Faith.
That’s all for today folks. Please leave your comments, like this video and subscribe to this channel. God bless you.