critical thinking in bible

How to go to Heaven

How to get right with god.

What does the Bible say about critical thinking?

For further study, related articles, subscribe to the, question of the week.

Get our Question of the Week delivered right to your inbox!

OpenBible.info Geocoding Topical Bible Labs Blog

What does the Bible say about ?

A ‣ B ‣ C ‣ D ‣ E ‣ F ‣ G ‣ H ‣ I ‣ J ‣ K ‣ L ‣ M ‣ N ‣ O ‣ P ‣ Q ‣ R ‣ S ‣ T ‣ U ‣ V ‣ W ‣ Y ‣ Z

20 Bible Verses about Critical Thinking

Proverbs 14:15 esv / 112 helpful votes helpful not helpful.

The simple believes everything, but the prudent gives thought to his steps.

2 Timothy 2:7 ESV / 81 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 ESV / 47 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

But test everything; hold fast what is good.

1 John 4:1 ESV / 41 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.

Proverbs 18:17 ESV / 22 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

Acts 17:11 ESV / 17 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.

2 Corinthians 10:5 ESV / 15 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ,

Proverbs 9:10 ESV / 13 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight.

Isaiah 1:18 ESV / 11 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

“Come now, let us reason together, says the Lord : though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool.

1 John 4:7-17 ESV / 8 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love. In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him. In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. ...

Colossians 2:8 ESV / 8 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.

Proverbs 25:1-28 ESV / 8 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

These also are proverbs of Solomon which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah copied. It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out. As the heavens for height, and the earth for depth, so the heart of kings is unsearchable. Take away the dross from the silver, and the smith has material for a vessel; take away the wicked from the presence of the king, and his throne will be established in righteousness. ...

2 Timothy 2:15-16 ESV / 5 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. But avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness,

Proverbs 23:7 ESV / 4 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

For he is like one who is inwardly calculating. “Eat and drink!” he says to you, but his heart is not with you.

Matthew 18:6 ESV / 3 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

Matthew 7:1 ESV / 3 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

“Judge not, that you be not judged.

1 Samuel 1:2 ESV / 3 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

He had two wives. The name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other, Peninnah. And Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children.

John 1:1 ESV / 2 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Matthew 2:3 ESV / 2 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him;

Genesis 1:1 ESV / 2 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

Suggest a Verse

Enter a verse reference (e.g., john 3:16-17 ).

Visit the Bible online to search for words if you don’t know the specific passage your’re looking for.

Unless otherwise indicated, all content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are taken from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version. Copyright ©2001 by Crossway Bibles , a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Contact me: openbibleinfo (at) gmail.com.

Internet Explorer is no longer supported. Try downloading another browser like Chrome or Firefox .

If you already have an account, Sign in.

Answers in Genesis
Patricia Engler Blog

The 7 Checks of Critical Thinking

Picture this: you’re sitting in a classroom, scrolling social media, or watching TV when you encounter an argument you’ve never heard before against a teaching from Scripture, like the six-day creation. 1 Biblically, you know the argument can’t be true. Yet it sounds so . . . persuasive! What do you do?

Don’t panic when you hear a faith-challenging message. God’s Word is true, so anything that contradicts it must be false.
Break the message down with the “7 Checks of Critical Thinking.”
Follow up on any remaining questions you have by consulting God, biblical mentors, and trusted apologetics resources. 3

So, what are those “7 Checks of Critical Thinking” for breaking down any message? Let’s take a look.

1. Check Scripture

God ’s Word is our authority for truth, because God is the only One who has always been there, who knows everything, who cannot lie, and who reveals the big picture of reality through the Bible . That’s why God ’s Word is the only sure foundation for our thinking in everything. So, when we hear any new message, the first question to ask is, “How does this message compare with Scripture?”

Of course, before we can answer that, we need a deep familiarity with what the Bible says. This reality highlights the importance of spiritual foundations —personally knowing God and His Word, which Christian students I’ve met worldwide said was so important for keeping their faith at university.

2. Check the Challenge

Sometimes, as you compare a message against Scripture, you realize it doesn’t challenge a non-negotiable doctrine of Scripture, like the existence of Adam. 4 Instead, it addresses a negotiable side-issue, like the question of how many Magi visited Jesus . A few questions can help you discern whether a message opposes a non-negotiable doctrine:

Does the message conflict with a clear teaching from Scripture?
Does it conflict with the big picture of what the Bible teaches?
Does it conflict with the way most Christians have interpreted the Bible for thousands of years?

3. Check the Source

Another important question to ask is where is this information coming from ? What is the source’s credibility? Are they an expert in a relevant field? 5 What’s their worldview starting point— God ’s Word or man’s word? Could they have other motives for sharing this message? How was the information collected? Is it being reported accurately?

4. Check the Definitions

The next step is to clarify the definitions used for any keywords in the message. Many words carry multiple meanings or mean different things to different people. So, when I heard certain words like person , science , or evolution , I always found it helpful to think about how that word was being used, and whether its meaning subtly switched during the course of the message. If you do notice a word’s meaning switch, you’ve detected a logical fallacy called equivocation .

5. Check for Propaganda

Now, it’s time to sort out fact from propaganda, which tries to persuade by appealing to something besides logic—like emotions, aesthetics, or the human desire for acceptance. To catch propaganda, ask “Why does this message sound true? Is it trying to persuade based on logic, or on something else? Is that “something else” relevant to the message’s truth?”

6. Check the Interpretations

With propaganda out of the way, you should be left with just the facts—and their interpretations. The facts are the parts of the message we can observe in the present using the scientific method. But other parts of the message may be interpretations of those facts based on assumptions about the past, which we can’t directly observe. 6 So, to separate fact from interpretations, I always found it helpful to ask, “What are the assumptions behind this message, and what’s another way to explain the same observations from a biblical perspective?”

7. Check the Logic

At this point, you will have already caught many potential fallacies in a message. But there could still be other flawed logic lurking behind the facts. So, now’s the time to do a final check for other forms of faulty reasoning, including circular reasoning , straw man arguments , or formal fallacies . Ask, “Are there any other errors in reasoning that should make me think twice before believing this message?”

There’s a lot more to say about each of these checks, but this summary presents an overview of the critical thinking framework which helped me during university—and which can help any Christian navigate secular classrooms or culture. For more on how to think critically about any faith-challenging message, stay tuned for future blog articles and CT (Critical Thinking) Scan videos, coming soon to a screen near you!

For more about why a literal interpretation matters for biblical doctrine, see https://answersingenesis.org/why-does-creation-matter/ .
For more on evolution and why evolutionary origins are incompatible with a biblical worldview, see https://answersingenesis.org/evolution/ .
Answersingenesis.org is a great place to start, with resources including free articles , videos , online books , and a web store .
For more about why non-negotiable doctrines hinge on Adam’s existence, see https://answersingenesis.org/adam-and-eve/ .
Beware, though: even experts can believe wrong information and, like everyone else, are biased by the worldviews they start with.
For more on the difference between observational and historical science, see https://answersingenesis.org/what-is-science/what-is-science/ .
International Outreach
Buddy Davis Blog
Danny Faulkner Blog
Ken’s Blog
Nathaniel Jeanson Blog
David Menton Blog
Tommy Mitchell
Terry Mortenson Blog
Bryan Osborne Blog
Georgia Purdom Blog
Calvin Smith Blog

Get the latest answers emailed to you.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for signing up to receive email newsletters from Answers in Genesis.

You can also sign up for our free print newsletter (US only).

Finish your subscription

You're almost done! Please follow the instructions we emailed you in order to finish subscribing.

Your newsletter signup did not work out. Please refresh the page and try again.

Answers in Genesis is an apologetics ministry , dedicated to helping Christians defend their faith and proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ .

Customer Service 800.778.3390
© 2024 Answers in Genesis

Grab your FREE CHEAT SHEET summarizing the Four-Point Case for Christianity (scroll to the bottom)

Check out our youtube channel with over 454,000 subscribers, don't forget to subscribe to our weekly newsletter, join the crossexamined community for bonus resources, like-minded people, and monthly community zoom meetings.

Critical Thinking: The Secret Weapon of Confident Christians

By Jason Jiminez
View (8740)

by Jason Jiminez | Apr 10, 2024 | Theology and Christian Apologetics

As Christians, developing critical thinking skills and maintaining an informed understanding of our faith is crucial. The world is full of misinformation and uncertainty, making it difficult to distinguish truth from falsehood. It is not enough for Christians to blindly adhere to whatever traditions or practices they have inherited from the past. They should critically evaluate and discern the relevance and validity of these traditions in their present context.

With so many different worldviews competing for our attention, staying engaged and equipped with our beliefs is essential. Without the intellectual stamina to navigate these opposing views, we risk becoming uninformed and ill-prepared to face the challenges of contemporary society.

The Age of Competing Ideas

In a recent interview with John Stonestreet, president of the Colson Center, I asked him why so many Christians lack the ability to think critically. His initial response was that many Christians lack the proper training in biblical doctrine and have not been catechized in the basic categories of reality. John added,

“We live in a world where we are bombarded with a lot of information, most of which is not objective or neutral. This makes it difficult to determine what to believe and whom to trust. Therefore, this era is better called ‘The Age of Competing Ideas,’ which leads to ‘The Age of Competing Authority.’”

I have seen firsthand how a lack of critical thinking about one’s faith can leave a Christian susceptible to false teachings or worldly philosophies. Paul warned in Colossians 2:8 , “Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ” (NLT).

We are exhorted by the apostle Paul to “Test everything; hold fast what is good” ( 1 Thessalonians 5:21 ). Christianity is not about unquestioningly accepting things without using reasoning and intellect. Instead, it is about having faith while also engaging your mind.

Not Just Belief, but Informed Belief

Therefore, we must recognize the role of informed beliefs in Christianity and draw on the biblical foundations of critical thinking to equip ourselves with the knowledge necessary to distinguish truth from falsehood.

Critical thinking is a systematic skill that involves analyzing and assessing a particular belief, idea, argument, or issue in an unbiased manner. After thoroughly examining the subject matter, the individual arrives at a conclusion that makes the most sense of and aligns with reality. In Christianity, possessing a biblical worldview means approaching life matters with an understanding of the Word of God and proper discernment that aligns with biblical doctrine.

I like what David Dockery says about the quality of Christians possessing a robust worldview in his book What Does It Mean to Be a Thoughtful Christian? . Dockery writes,

“A Christian worldview is not escapism but an energizing motivation for godly and faithful thinking and living in the here-and-now. In the midst of life’s challenges and struggles, a Christian worldview provides confidence and hope for the future while helping to stabilize life, serving as an anchor to link us to God’s faithfulness and steadfastness.”

Three Critical Thinking Skills

Applying these three foundational tips in your daily life is an excellent start for developing the art and skill of critical thinking.

Know and pursue truth wisely: Truth is an objective reality that corresponds with, rather than contradicts, the actual state of things. By analyzing, observing, and submitting to objective truth, you will become more aware of the facts that support your Christian beliefs. Proverbs 4:7 advises, “The beginning of wisdom is this: Get wisdom, and whatever you get, get insight.” Solomon emphasizes the importance of pursuing wisdom as you acquire knowledge and understanding to overcome life’s challenges as a Christian.
Stay grounded in God’s Word: Sadly, less than 20% of self-proclaimed Christians read the Bible daily. Of those who do, the majority only read one verse a day. Reading portions of the Bible daily will enhance your knowledge of Scripture, provide moral fortitude, give insight into wise decision-making, and help you resist temptations.
Embrace questions and objections: Christians should be the last to shy away from people who object to or challenge their faith. Peter directly speaks to this when he affirms, “But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect” (1 Peter 3:15). Don’t be afraid when someone asks you tough questions about your beliefs. Be prepared to explain why you believe in what you do. If you don’t know the answer to a question, make an effort to research and understand the material. Studying and understanding the material thoroughly will enable you to communicate effectively with others. Lastly, remember always to be respectful towards others, even if their beliefs differ from yours.

I hope you have been challenged to continue developing your critical thinking skills. This will not only keep you informed and prevent you from being deceived, but it will also increase your passion for God’s truth and enable you to become a great defender of the Christian faith. We need more defenders of the faith, and I believe you have the potential to become one!

Facebook Comments

CrossExamined.org is a non-profit ministry started in 2006 that conducts dynamic I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be An Atheist seminars on college campuses, churches, and high schools.

subscribe to blog

Total subscribers: 102,522.

EVENTS CALENDAR

Recent videos, watch our videos on youtube.

Watch our Videos on Facebook

Spanish Blog

Mis cielos – no están en las estrellas

0 Comment Apr 28th, 2023

¿Podemos legislar la moral?

0 Comment Apr 14th, 2023

¿Quién hizo a Dios?

0 Comment Apr 7th, 2023

Cuando tu oponente hace trampas, ¿qué debes hacer?

0 Comment Mar 31th, 2023

Contact Cross Examined

Have general questions, schedule a cross examined speaker, find a cross examined speaker near you.

What Is Christian Apologetics?
Seminar Topics
Youth Exodus Problem
Our Solution
BLOG ESPAÑOL
Does Truth Exist?
Does God Exist?
Is The New Testament True?
Are Miracles Possible?
Theology and Christian Apologetics
Legislating Morality, Culture & Politics
Podcast (I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist)
Podcast en Español
Egypt & Saudi Arabia tour with Frank Turek
Instructors
Lodging – TBD
Frank Turek Calendar
J. Warner Wallace Calendar
Introduction to Theology
The Historical Reliability of the Gospels
Stealing From God
Textual Criticism with Dr. Dan Wallace
I Still Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
Resurrection of Jesus
Blog Español
Cross Ex App
Radio & Podcast
Articles on Truth
Articles on God
Articles on the Bible
Articles on Church Beliefs
Articles on Morality and Politics
Articles on Intelligent Design / Evolution
Apologetics Curriculum
Apologetics Hub
Impact Apologetics
Online Courses

Pin It on Pinterest

40 Bible Verses about Critical Thinking

The pursuit of wisdom and discernment, central tenets of critical thinking, find deep resonance in the Scriptures. The Bible, rich in wisdom literature, encourages us to seek understanding and insight.

“Get wisdom, get understanding; do not forget my words or turn away from them,” implores Solomon in Proverbs 4:5 , highlighting the value of wisdom and critical thought in our lives. In the complexity of our modern world, the ability to think critically, to weigh decisions, and discern truth is invaluable, and Scripture offers timeless guidance on cultivating these skills.

Throughout the Bible, we encounter figures who exemplify critical thinking. Daniel, with his wise and discerning spirit, stands out in the court of Babylon, or the Bereans in Acts, who are commended for diligently examining the Scriptures. These examples serve as testaments to the importance of thoughtful analysis and discernment in our faith journey and daily decisions.

The Bible does not shy away from encouraging questioning and exploration. From the Proverbs exalting wisdom and understanding to Jesus’ parables challenging conventional thinking, the Scriptures invite us to engage with our world and our faith thoughtfully and discerningly. Critical thinking, as presented in the Bible, is not about skepticism for its own sake, but about seeking truth, understanding God’s will, and applying His teachings wisely.

In this collection, we present 40 Bible verses about critical thinking. Each verse offers insight into the biblical perspective on critical thinking, encouraging us to embrace wisdom, seek understanding, and apply discernment in all aspects of our lives.

May these verses guide you in developing a thoughtful, discerning mind, grounded in the wisdom that comes from above, helping you navigate the complexities of life with clarity and purpose.

Embracing Wisdom and Understanding

Proverbs 2:6.

“For the Lord gives wisdom; from his mouth come knowledge and understanding.”

“If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him.”

Proverbs 18:2

“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”

Ecclesiastes 7:25

“I turned my heart to know and to search out and to seek wisdom and the scheme of things, and to know the wickedness of folly and the foolishness that is madness.”

1 Kings 3:9

Give your servant therefore an understanding mind to govern your people, that I may discern between good and evil , for who is able to govern this your great people?

The Value of Inquiry and Analysis

Proverbs 14:15.

“The simple believes everything, but the prudent gives thought to his steps.”

“Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.”

Proverbs 15:14

“The heart of him who has understanding seeks knowledge, but the mouths of fools feed on folly.”

1 Thessalonians 5:21

Test everything; hold fast what is good.

Proverbs 19:20

Listen to advice and accept instruction, that you may gain wisdom in the future.

Discernment and Decision Making

Hebrews 5:14.

“But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil.”

Proverbs 3:21

“My son, do not lose sight of these—keep sound wisdom and discretion.”

“But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.”

Proverbs 17:24

The discerning sets his face toward wisdom, but the eyes of a fool are on the ends of the earth .

Philippians 1:9-10

And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent, and so be pure and blameless for the day of Christ.

The Counsel of Many Advisers

Proverbs 11:14.

“Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety.”

Proverbs 24:6

“For by wise guidance you can wage your war, and in abundance of counselors there is victory.”

Proverbs 15:22

“Without counsel plans fail, but with many advisers they succeed.”

Proverbs 12:15

The way of a fool is right in his own eyes , but a wise man listens to advice.

Exodus 18:21

Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens.

Reflective Thinking and Self-Examination

2 corinthians 13:5.

“Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you fail to meet the test!”

Lamentations 3:40

“Let us test and examine our ways, and return to the Lord!”

Psalm 119:59

“I pondered the direction of my life, and I turned to follow your laws.”

“Now, therefore, thus says the Lord of hosts: Consider your ways.”

Galatians 6:4

“But let each one test his own work, and then his reason to boast will be in himself alone and not in his neighbor.”

Fostering Intellectual Humility and Openness

Proverbs 13:10.

“By insolence comes nothing but strife, but with those who take advice is wisdom.”

Romans 12:16

“Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight.”

Proverbs 26:12

“Do you see a man who is wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.”

“Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom.”

Proverbs 15:31

“The ear that listens to life-giving reproof will dwell among the wise.”

Seeking Truth and Avoiding Deception

Proverbs 8:7.

“For my mouth will utter truth; wickedness is an abomination to my lips.”

Ephesians 4:25

“Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another.”

Proverbs 14:8

“The wisdom of the prudent is to discern his way, but the folly of fools is deceiving.”

“And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

2 Timothy 2:15

“Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.”

The Role of Reason and Logic in Faith

Isaiah 1:18.

Come now, let us reason together, says the Lord: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool.

“And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and tried to persuade Jews and Greeks.”

1 Peter 3:15

“But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect.”

2 Corinthians 10:5

“We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ.”

Luke 14:28-30

“For which of you, desiring to build a tower, does not first sit down and count the cost, whether he has enough to complete it? Lest haply, after he has laid the foundation, and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him, saying, ‘This man began to build and was not able to finish.

Valuing Knowledge and Understanding

Proverbs 1:5.

“Let the wise hear and increase in learning, and the one who understands obtain guidance.”

Colossians 2:2-3

“That their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Christ.”

Proverbs 9:10

“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight.”

Daniel 1:17

As for these four youths, God gave them learning and skill in all literature and wisdom, and Daniel had understanding in all visions and dreams .

Proverbs 4:7

“The beginning of wisdom is this: Get wisdom, and whatever you get, get insight.”

These 40 Bible verses underscore the importance of critical thinking in the pursuit of wisdom and truth. They emphasize intellectual humility, the search for understanding, reasoning in faith, and valuing knowledge. These scriptures guide believers to engage their minds fully in their spiritual journey, encouraging them to think deeply, question, learn, and grow in their understanding of God and His world.

I’m Benjamin, a passionate spiritual seeker and creator of Verses and Prayers. Alongside my girlfriend Emma and our pet lizard Mulle, I cherish family life, enjoy exploring new places, and am deeply involved in my church community. My love for reading and singing biblical verses inspires every aspect of my journey.

Subscribe to receive weekly emails of the Reasons for Hope blog.

Jesus: the master of critical thinking.

Canadian Bible Guy

Critical thinking and christianity.

One of my pet peeves is when Christians are characterized as blind fools who can’t think for themselves. Perhaps this is because I don’t like being insulted in this fashion, but honestly it bothers me more because it simply isn’t true. Not only do I know many incredibly smart and thoughtful believers, but as a student pastor I regularly encourage young people to take the brain God gave them and put it to good use. I say things like, Being a Christian doesn’t mean you stop thinking and just “have faith”. Faith is based on reason. Christians should be people who strive after the truth and think critically. They should not be blind followers. If your faith hasn’t been well thought through then it will collapse when the challenges of life confront it.

Even the Bible, which promotes faith, also promotes critical thinking. The greatest command of all is to “love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength” (Luke 10:27). The centre of Christianity is, in part, loving God with your mind . There is a thinking aspect to faith. We are not given the capacity to reason and think so that we could leave those faculties at the door. Rather, they are to be harnessed for the right purposes—namely, loving God and loving others.

Scripture has other things to say about the role of thinking in the life of a Christian. Proverbs 14:15 says “The simple believes everything, but the prudent gives thoughts to his steps.” The biblical stance is that gullibility is to be resisted, and careful thinking used in its place. Even people of faith are actually discouraged in the Bible from being those who will believe anything.

Another passage, 1 Thessalonians 5:21, says to “Test everything, hold fast to what is good.” In context, this is referring to “prophecies”, or statements made either about God or from God. In other words, just because someone comes along and says something about God doesn’t mean we should believe it. Instead, truth claims about God or from God should be tested. There is an element of critical thought that goes into this process. Christians should not believe everything they hear, because some information is true and some information is false.

The Bible never anywhere calls for people to have blind faith. This is because faith is not entirely blind. There is an element of acting on the unknown when it comes to faith, but that does not mean that faith can’t be grounded in reality. It certainly can—and should—be.

For example, Christians believe that God created the universe. That is an act of faith. Hebrews 11:3 says “By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.” Yet, that does not mean this belief is objectively “blind”. No one was there to see how the world came about. Those who believe the universe came into existence by purely natural forces are also exercising a degree of faith, since they were not there to see it either. Neither truth claim can be objectively proven to be true. But, there are reasons why one might believe a particular view over another. The question is, do Christians have any reasons to support their claim? The answer is that indeed they do.

As I have talked with skeptics and unbelievers, it becomes clear that many of them have such a limited understanding of what the Bible actually teaches or why Christians believe what they do that any real discussion about it is impossible. I remember when I was young and still pretty naive in my faith I would get very troubled by some of the arguments against Christianity. Only after I looked into it for myself and took the time to think through my faith did I become more grounded in the reasoning behind it.

I have tried on this blog and in my pastoral teaching to help people wrestle with the tough questions about the Bible and Christianity. I have regularly resisted the idea that Christian faith is to be naive and nothing but a leap in the dark. That’s not true for me, and I don’t want it to be true for others. A faith that is tested with hard questions and critical thought is what I’m after, and what I want to help forge in others.

My point in all of this is to encourage critical thinking among individuals and thoughtful dialogue among those who disagree. Hearing both Christians and non-Christians throw around the same old ad hominem attacks or straw-man arguments is tedious to say the least. There needs to be more respect among those who disagree and careful, honest conversation between them. Rather than dismissing one another with a wave of the hand, we should pursue the truth with an attitude of civility. I would very much like to be a part in helping that kind of thing happen more often.

15 Comments on “Critical Thinking and Christianity”

I appreciate how you must feel when your belief is looked upon as blind, unthinking belief. I just tackled this on my blog, but I’ll sum up quickly for you. You aren’t unthinking. You aren’t believing for no reason. You aren’t mental. But I’m convinced you believe for bad reasons. Not a few bad reasons, but hundreds or thousands of bad reasons acquired over a lifetime of confirmation bias and group think. I don’t think you’re a dumb sheep. I really don’t. But you do have a lifetime of really bad information to wade through.

Hey there Spartan Atheist, thanks for reading and commenting! I appreciate you not attacking the intelligence of people who disagree with you. That’s a refreshing take for people of different viewpoints to have, and I hope I share that too.

It’s interesting that your take on my belief is that it comes through confirmation bias, groupthink, and bad information. I’m not exactly sure how you can know that though, since you haven’t experienced my life first-hand. It’s just as easy for me to say the same about you, because those things exist in all kinds of walks of life, don’t they?

Anyways, I’ll have to check out your blog when I get the chance. At the very least you seem like the kind of person it would be fun to discuss things with. Take care!

Thank you, jeremyedgar3. I generally like people, and still like people that have one or two views I disagree with. So I enjoy calm and thoughtful and respectful discussion.

So, you’re right, I don’t have your particular experience. I don’t even know you. This is true. What I do know is my experience as a religious person. I’m also familiar with the beliefs of people of many different faiths. I’m also somewhat experienced in discussing mental wellness, and various cognitive issues we have that affect our everyday lives and interactions with others.

All I really need to do now is ask this two-part question- is there a religion that is wrong, and does it’s followers believe it is right? The answer is a yes for both. Even if I don’t know which religion is wrong, the many world religions do contradict each other. So at the very least, most of them are wrong. And if most of the religions are wrong, then most of their adherents are also wrong.

So why do adherents to religions stick to something that is wrong? Again, in theory I don’t know which one is right or wrong, I just know many are wrong. But the answers that all religious adherents give in defense of their faith boil down to the same failed fallacies.

Have I examined every argument in defense of every faith? No. This is my hypothesis. So far, with the information I have, it bears out on Christianity.

Well, adherents stick to something that is wrong either because (a) they don’t realize it’s wrong or (b) they DO know it’s wrong but refuse to change for any number of reasons. But that doesn’t really support either your view or mine directly in any way. All it shows is that someone (or everyone) is wrong.

The statement that religious arguments in defense of one’s faith are all “failed fallacies” would take some proving. I have not found it to be the case personally. Perhaps the failure or success of an argument is in the eye of the beholder.

I completely admit I’m making a general statement there. I can not ever prove that in every single instance a believer believes based on bad arguments. But I have watched dozens of online debates by the leading apologists of the faith, spent years speaking with preachers and the faithful of various religions, and had lifetime of listening to religious viewpoints. I have not yet heard of any evidence for any god, and without evidence we’re left with the remaining arguments that are just fallacious. If there were any good arguments, or evidence, I would think the leading apologists would have brought them up by now. This is how scientific theories come into being. One guy says that all living things are made of teeny-tiny individual structures called cells. Others scoff and begin to look for something to falsify the claim. However, every single example meets the claim. We can’t prove that EVERY single living thing is made of cells, but every single observation ever on the subject supports it. Cell Theory is therefore correct. Likewise, I claim no evidence, bad arguments. I’m eagerly awaiting the results of others to try to prove me wrong. They either will or they won’t, we shall see. Feel free to try yourself. But I completely agree that most adherents stick to their faith because they don’t realize it’s wrong. I see this as the role of atheists like myself voicing our disbelief- to get people to analyze their belief and shift toward believing in things that are real.

Spartan to say that no apologist has brought forth a good argument concerning the existence of God is simply your opinion. Which as we know will never be swayed. No amount of evidence would sway you, as you simply brush aside the mountains of evidence all around you. The fine tuning of the universe, the complexity of life at all levels, the impossibility of our universe springing into existence out of nothing – from nothing, the existence of objective morality, the historicity of the crucifixion and empty tomb, the stalwart beliefs of the apostles that led them to torturous deaths – while they denied Jesus only days before to save their hides, the INCREDIBLE collection of inspired documents we call the Bible- written over a 1500 year period by over 40 authors on three continents.

I could go on, but carpal tunnel will soon kick in. You can deny some things, or all things, but you cannot claim that no apologist has brought forth evidence in support of God. You just don’t agree with the interpretation of that evidence. Countless others do, myself included. Not just blind fools, but some of the worlds most educated, most esteemed and well respected from all walks of life and cultures see and accept the vast evidence for God all around us. We do not need a scientist in a while lab coat to validate that.

In actuality, science is the wrong instrument to detect God in the first place… as God by definition must be Supernatural, which is well outside of the reach of science.

Well said, Keith, on every point. God bless you, brother.

Stand Tall For Christ (Keith Mosher) God bless you for not defending the faith we have. I’m grateful.

Pingback: Debating Atheists: Three Types of Atheist – Stand Tall For Christ

Thank you very much for this thoughtful post. Faith is something that I have been struggling with recently. I know that part of my journey needs to be further study and reasoning beyond what I know on the surface, and I am glad I am not the only person who thinks that is the best way to approach it.

Thank you so much for writing this. One of my college teachers who teaches critical thinking is choosing assignments against God, who have quotes of God being almost a joke to them, and this is just week 2. Why not topics on the effects of carpet? Or eating dairy? Why attack God? Thank you for writing this.

Hi there. I stumbled onto your post in my search between critical thinking and being a Christian. I recently started university. It is not even a month and I have been confronted with a lack of thinking critically. I was not raised to be a critical thinker, it was not encouraged that much at home around the dinner table nor in church.

A really good friend of mine is an atheist and we often have the conversation of Christianity. It is the first time I am being challenged in why I believe, why I have faith and when did I choose to do so. Some of the arguments he makes is valid. And I do not always have the answers to the difficult questions he confronts me with. This post, however, gives a little more insight in the answers I am after.

Thank you for seeking out the hard questions. I really appreciate it.

I’m glad that you found some value in my post! I also was not raised to be a critical thinker…or, perhaps at that time in my life I didn’t really care and just wanted to play sports and video games. Either way, like you, my faith was tested in university. I was not prepared for what I faced there. Looking back, however, it was one of the best things for my faith because it FORCED me to dig deeper and look for answers. For some people, it ends up destroying their faith. Thankfully, for me, it actually saved mine. I hope it does for you too. I have had some help from lots of good resources over the years, but the one that helped me the most was the very first book I read along these lines: The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel. It gave me some confidence that believing in the Bible and Jesus wasn’t completely crazy. It also gave me some specific names of people to look up further and read their books and blog posts. In short, that opened up a whole new world to me of academic-level thinkers who love Jesus and made good arguments for the faith. Perhaps your journey will take a similar route as mine. If you’re looking for specific resources I would be happy to help as best I can.

Great blog you have hhere

I totally agree with your article. I listen to a lot of atheist vs theist debates and quite frankly they can get a bit tedious. The same arguments being batted back and forth often being done with closed minds. I’m a Christian but I do have trouble with some aspects of the Bible. When I try and raise issues with Christian friends, often they don’t really listen and trot out stock answers which don’t answer the actual question or say that you are thinking too much. It can be really annoying. Thankfully I have a wise brother who thinks through issues too. So at least I have him. God gave me a mind and difficult questions sometimes come to me. I’m not going to just dismiss them. I need to try and understand.

Critical Thinking and Commentaries

There are several reasons one wants to read a commentary last when studying the Bible. When one interprets the scriptures he or she needs to: identify the complete thought of the passage; examine the content of the passage; examine the context of the passage; outline the story, argument, or poetic structure of any given passage; consult experts, and apply the passage. See how consulting the experts is last? There are a few reasons for why this is the case.

Internal evidence is to be preferred over external evidence for the author’s intended meaning. Usually the what the author says, the author means, unless there is strong evidence to indicate otherwise.
You can only work with the evidence you have. Some experts are so biased against the text, for any given number or reasons, that they will make up hypothesis to try to destroy the intended meaning.
The goal is authorial intent, not what makes us feel better.
Not all experts are equal. Some have done more extensive study than others.
All experts are biased one way or another.

These past couple of weeks we have been studying Genesis 1. As we have discussed, it is one of the most contested passages in the whole Bible. There have been many scholars who have written on Genesis to make it intellectually acceptable to those who refuse to believe it. This is reflected in how they write about it. Due to all of the biases against the passage (or any given passage), it is important to use critical thinking skills when interacting with these commentators.

One commentator I have had to use plenty of critical thinking skills with was John Skinner’s commentary, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis published in 1910. Dr. Skinner was the principle and professor of Old Testament language and literature at Westminster College in Cambridge. He seems like a guy who would know what he is talking about when studying Genesis, but his writing contradicts the internal and external evidence of the message in Genesis and who the author is. He writes,

“It has been shown in the Introduction (p. xxxiii) that the most obvious division of the book of Genesis is into four nearly equal parts, of which the first (chs. 1–11) deals with the Creation of the world, and the history of primitive mankind prior to the call of Abraham. These chapters are composed of excerpts from two of the main sources of the Pent., the Priestly Code, and the Yahwistic document.” [1]

It is clear from this quote, and the long introduction, that Dr. Skinner believed that Genesis was not written by Moses, but by a compilation of oral tradition, mythology from the surrounding regions, conflicting creation accounts, the Priestly code developed around the second temple period, and the Yahwistic Document developed sometime around Ezra and Nehemiah. The problem is all of these sources are in the head of people who accept the “Documentary Hypothesis”. There are no manuscripts that prove otherwise. We even have finds today Dr. Skinner was not aware of that further prove the authenticity of the Old Testament i.e. the Dead Sea scrolls, dated to 200 B.C.- 68 A.D., and the silver scrolls containing the Numeric and Deuteronic blessings, dated to 600 B.C. [2] We do not find any significant variants that support these outlandish claims that there are different versions of Genesis scattered throughout history. It is only in the mind of the skeptics like Dr. Skinner.

Dr. Skinner is an extreme example of skeptical commentaries on the book of Genesis. There are better commentaries today that better reflect the intent of the author. Yet, Dr. Skinner is a good example of why one should consult commentaries last. Commentaries can be useful in consulting the grammar and historical context of a passage. Dr. Derek Kinder makes this useful observation on Genesis 1,

“Grammatically, this phrase could be translated as introducing a clause completed in verse 3 after a parenthetical verse 2: ‘When God began to create … (the earth was without form …), God said, Let there be light …’ This would not be saying that the undeveloped earth was not of God’s making; only that creation, in its full sense, still had far to go. But the familiar translation, ‘In the beginning God …’, is equally grammatical, is supported by all the ancient versions, and affirms unequivocally the truth laid down elsewhere (e.g. Heb. 11:3) that until God spoke, nothing existed.” [3]

This comment supports the internal context of the passage and the exterior context of the Bible. God was certainly not done with creation and nothing existed before He spoke.

The main point of this lesson is that when we read a commentator, we have to filter what that commentator says with the internal evidence, the context of the passage, and a little common sense. We cannot just take a commentator blindly. They could be wrong.

I hope this has blessed you. If you want to dive deeper into biblical interpretation, please check out my books presented in the resources page. These books and booklet will help you know how to study the Bible better as well as know and love Jesus more. Lord bless you.

[1] John Skinner, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis , (Edinberg, Scotland, T&T Clark, 1910). 1

[2] Clive Anderson, and Brian Edwards, Evidence for the Bible, (Green Forest, Arizona, 2018). 19

[3] Derek Kinder, Genesis An Introduction and Commentary , Volume 1 of the Tyndale Commentary Series (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Intervarsity Press, 1967). 47 – 48.

Published by josiahrnichols

I am a pastor, teacher, and author of the Using Hermeneutics Series. I love the subjects of interpreting the Bible, apologetics, and evangelism. I love to use these subjects to help people know and love Jesus more. View all posts by josiahrnichols

Critical Thinking

INTRODUCTION

In the following essay, we will briefly discuss the nature of an argument, the law of non-contradiction, and a selection of informal fallacies. We will also present a helpful cache of tough questions, which can be used when engaging various worldviews. Finally, we will look at how to discern the assumptions behind the information presented in the media. This survey is designed to provide you with an introduction to the art of critical thinking.

Why are so many people in today’s society swayed by mere emotionalism, or trapped by the most recent propaganda disseminated across our airwaves, television, or in the classroom? While there are several factors involved in answering this question, one primary reason is that people do not think critically.

What is an Argument?

Most people think an argument occurs when people get together, raise their voices, and call each other names. Properly speaking, this is not an argument, but an altercation. An argument, understood in a philosophical or logical context, is where we draw conclusions from various premises. There are several words that we use to indicate when we are presenting a premise and when we are presenting a conclusion. When indicating a premise, we use such words as: because, for, for this reason, as, if, based on the fact that, etc . When demonstrating a conclusion, we typically use: therefore, thus, consequently, hence, it follows that, etc . It’s good to keep these indicators in mind so that you can detect an argument.

It is common for arguments to be confused with assertions. Assertions are the expressions of opinions without supporting premises. For example, it is common to hear someone assert that there are contradictions in the Bible, but just saying so doesn’t make it so. When you hear assertions like this, the proper response is to ask questions, such as, “Can you give me some examples?” 1

The Law of Non-Contradiction

This law is the foundation for all logical thinking. It may be defined as follows: a statement (a proposition) cannot be true and not true at the same time and in the same respect. For example: It cannot be both raining and not raining at the same time and in the same respect.

Humans did not invent the laws of logic any more than they invented the laws of nature — such as the law of gravity. In fact, throughout the Bible, the law of non-contradiction is implied. Without this law, nothing could be interpreted as true or false. Right thinking imitates God’s thinking; and because God does not contradict himself (his Word cannot be broken — John 10:35; he cannot lie — Hebrews 6:18), Christians should seek to avoid contradiction. Without the law of non-contradiction we would never be able to detect a lie. 2

In fact, if someone wants to deny the law of non-contradiction, that person immediately runs back into it, because they would have to presuppose that it’s true in order to prove that it’s false. Imagine the following conversation:

“Hey, I don’t think the law of non-contradiction is really that important. In fact, I believe that we don’t need to follow it at all.” “Really? So you think we need to follow the law of non-contradiction. You really believe it’s that important?” “Didn’t you hear me? I said just the opposite from what you said I said.” “If the law of non-contradiction really isn’t important, then we are both correct.”

When expressing a denial or affirmation of any claim, proposition, belief, or idea, one must presuppose the law of non-contradiction. It is fundamental to any kind of distinctions: right and wrong, good and bad, true and false. 3

LOGICAL FALLACIES

A fallacy is simply a faulty argument. In the process of reasoning, there are two types of fallacies that occur: formal and informal. Formal fallacies deal with the actual form of the argument. When an argument is structured incorrectly it is fallacious. Even when an argument is formally correct, it may still be informally fallacious. The conclusion may not actually follow from the premises due to a faulty gathering of information, circular reasoning, or some other mistake. Informal fallacies are the more common of the two types of fallacies, and will be covered in this paper.

Below we provide a list of some common informal fallacies, a brief explanation of each, and an illustration or two. We have not provided an exhaustive catalogue because there seem to be an endless number of ways that people can make mistakes in their thinking, and we do not have the space to explain them all.

Fallacies of Ambiguity

Communication can be difficult. Difficulties arise from differing cultures, age groups, races, prejudices, and especially from differing worldviews. One of the most important ground rules for clear communication is clear definitions. We may be unnecessarily frustrated if others misunderstand what we say because they either don’t know what a word means, or we simply have not supplied clear definitions for the words we use.

Equivocation: The fallacy of equivocation occurs when we use different definitions for the same word, or when a word is taken in a different way than intended (a different definition). Many words have different meanings depending on their context. Consider the following examples:

“All men are created equal? If that were so, then there wouldn’t be so many rich people.” “If all men are created equal, then why am I so short?”

The difficulty that arises in these examples is that the statement “all men are created equal” means that all men should be equally valued as human beings. It was never intended to mean that we are all clones of one another, or that we would have equal incomes.

There is a special type of equivocation that can occur with relative terms like tall or short . These types of words must be understood in relation to something else. To claim that something or someone is tall assumes a relation to other people or things. The vagueness of these types of terms can only be clarified by context.

It should be noted that much of our humor rests in equivocations. In a humorous context, we call it a “play on words.” Also, sometimes an equivocation can be intentional and witty, such as when Ben Franklin declared, “We must all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.” The word hang is intended to be understood quite differently in each usage.

When Christians are witnessing to people who are involved in pseudo-Christian religions (i.e. cults), they need to be very careful to define their words so as not to be misunderstood. For example, while Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses both use the name of Jesus Christ, they have completely different meanings. The Jehovah’s Witness believes that Jesus was the first created being and was, in fact, the Archangel Michael before he became the man Jesus. The Mormons, on the other hand, believe that Jesus is literally our older brother from a pre-existence. Jesus is believed to be the firstborn of the Father and one of many gods. Given these differences, we need to make sure that we dig deeper into the meanings of what people say and not stay at a superficial level of communication. 4

Fallacies of Relevance

This section will deal with fallacies that occur when something irrelevant to the question of truth is added to an argument in the attempt to persuade.

Appeal to Pity: This fallacy occurs when one tries to persuade by invoking the listener to feel sorry for the individual or group for whom one is arguing. Many times, pity is an appropriate reaction, but it is not always a valid means of persuasion.

For example, sometimes abortion advocates will argue that if you make poor women carry their babies to term, they may not be cared for properly, or that if you outlaw abortion, then women will have to return to the “back alley butchers” to get abortions. While these arguments may be emotionally persuasive, they are not relevant to the issue at hand. One is never justified in killing a child just because life becomes harder for the mother.

Ad Hominem: Ad hominem means “argument to the person.” This fallacy is committed when, instead of dealing with what a person is arguing, someone attacks his or her character. This is fallacious because a person’s character typically has no bearing on the truth or falsehood of his or her claims. Here are some examples:

“You are wrong because you are an intolerant, closed-minded, right-wing fundamentalist.” “You can’t trust anything he says. He is a liberal pagan atheist and has no basis for morality.”

Appeal to Ignorance: This fallacy can occur in two ways. 1) To argue that something is true because it hasn’t been proven to be false; or 2) to argue that something is false because it hasn’t been proven to be true. Just because there is no proof against your position does not prove your position true. Likewise, just because a position has not been proven does not mean that it is false. Here are a couple examples:

“You cannot prove God does not exist, therefore God exists.” “You cannot prove God does exist, therefore God does not exist.”

Red Herring: A herring is a fish that can be used to distract and confuse bloodhounds on the scent of game. Similarly, this fallacy is the introduction of an irrelevant side issue into an argument which ultimately distracts and confuses the case being presented. Often positive (or even negative) reasons offered for a conclusion have nothing to do with conclusion. Here are a couple of examples:

“Of course she’s a good doctor. She drives a great car and is really funny.” “You believe abortion is murder, yet you are in support of capital punishment?”

Fallacies of Presumption

Fallacies of presumption are those fallacies where someone holds to an unjustified conclusion. This is usually caused by overlooking, denying, evading, or distorting the facts.

Hasty Generalization: When you wish to make an argument for a certain position, you need to gather information for support. In doing this, you must be very careful to gather sufficient evidence to support your conclusion. The fallacy of hasty generalization is committed when a person gathers too little information to support the conclusion being argued.

Just because one or two taxi drivers are rude and obnoxious does not mean that you can generalize that all (or even most) taxi drivers behave this way. All that can legitimately be drawn from such a sampling is that the particular taxi drivers you have encountered were rude and obnoxious. In the same way, just because a person may encounter a couple of Christian TV evangelists who have questionable character does not mean one can conclude that all Christians have questionable character.

These examples get at the heart of the most common way this fallacy is manifest: prejudices. Our prejudices are typically built on a very small sampling, and then are generalized and applied to an entire group (or sub-group) of people or things.

Sweeping Generalization: The fallacy of sweeping generalization is committed when one takes a general rule and applies it absolutely to all instances, not recognizing that there are exceptions. The generalization might be a very fair one, but the application in particular, uncommon, or unique instances may not be valid.

For example, exercise is generally a good thing. Yet what if you have a heart condition? One could say, “Aerobics is the best way to exercise, and Jenny really needs exercise for her heart condition.” The problem is that while aerobics might be “the best way to exercise,” it would obviously not be the right way for Jenny. Instead of it helping her, it might kill her. Here are a couple more examples:

“I haven’t met a single moral atheist. Therefore, no atheists are moral.” “All Christians hate homosexuals. At least, all the ones I know do.”

Begging the Question: This fallacy occurs when one simply assumes what he or she is trying to prove. This situation can be demonstrated in the following conversation between two thieves who just stole three bars of gold:

Thief A: “So how are we going to divide the gold?” Thief B: “I should get two bars and you can have one.” Thief A: “Why should you get two bars?” Thief B: “Because I am the leader.” Thief A: “How did you get to be the leader?” Thief B: “Because I have two bars.”

Faulty Dilemma: This fallacy occurs when a person states that there are only a certain number of options, and you must choose between them, when in fact there are more options available.

In John 9:2–3 the disciples posed a faulty dilemma when, concerning a man who had been blind from birth, they asked, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”

This is an either/or type of question. Instead of answering the question with one of the suggested responses, Jesus denies both and supplies a third. Jesus said, “Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life.”

Complex Question: One common attempt by unbelievers to stump believers is to ask the age-old question: “Can God create a rock so big that he can’t lift it?” If you answer yes, then God’s omnipotence (all-powerfulness) is denied due to the fact that he can’t lift the rock. If you answer no, however, then God’s omnipotence is denied because he can’t create such a rock. Neither of these answers is satisfying to a Bible-believing Christian. How does one reason out of this dilemma?

This example can be classified as the fallacy of a complex question, or loaded question. What if I asked you, “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?” If you answer yes, that implies that you have been beating her. If you answer no, then you are still beating her. The problem lies in the question; it is one of those that is simply not fair to ask. You would have to respond that you have never beaten your wife, and that the question presupposes that you have. You can’t answer with a simple yes or a no.

Now back to God and the big rock. You cannot answer this question with a simple yes or no. What you have to do is show that the question is not fair. (It might be good to provide the question about beating one’s wife as an illustration of this.) You see, by definition, since God is omnipotent (and that is what the Bible teaches), he could create the largest rock possible. Also, because God is omnipotent, he could lift the largest possible rock. The problem with the question is that it is faulty; the question was loaded. You cannot set the creative expression of an omnipotent being against the abilities of an omnipotent being. That would be just as illogical as asking whether or not God could create a square circle or if God could count higher than infinity. It is not within the realm of reality to speak of such illusions, and they do not in any way illustrate any limitation in God’s power and abilities.

False Analogy: An analogy is said to be fallacious or false if it compares two objects that are actually relevantly dissimilar or if the points of comparison are used to draw a conclusion that simply does not follow. 5 Consider the following example:

“You Christians claim to have miracles to support your religion, but so do other religious traditions, such as Mormonism. Thus there is no reason to believe that Christianity is true.”

The two objects being compared are Christians and Mormons. Their status as religions and their claim that miracles occur and support their validity are the points of commonalities. However, the conclusion that Christianity is false because another religion claims miracles does not follow. For example, it is possible that miracles occur within both religions traditions. It is also possible that either Christianity or Mormonism have lied or believed falsely regarding the miracles claimed by their religion.

False Cause: This fallacy is committed when a person believes that just because one thing followed another there must be a causal connection.

In many ancient cultures, people believed that the gods caused all sickness. These cultures would therefore attempt to placate the wrath of their gods by means of various sacrifices. At times, the sickness would go away after the sacrifices. Because of this, their beliefs were reinforced. They believed that the gods had been placated, and the sickness was removed because of the sacrifice. Mere chronological sequence does not prove causation.

Straw Man: The straw man fallacy occurs when a person misrepresents another’s view so as to easily discredit it. This can happen intentionally or unintentionally. The image this fallacy conjures up is that of a person building a straw man simply to knock it over.

One might say, “You say that the New Testament teaches that we are not under law, and that we are saved by grace through faith alone. Therefore, what you teach is that we can sin all we want after we are saved.” This is a straw man according to Paul in Romans 6:15ff. The person making such an argument simplified the New Testament’s stance on the law, sin, and salvation in order to easily defeat a teaching they either didn’t understand or with which they didn’t agree.

Appeal to Majority: We see this fallacy when we appeal to a group of people to prove that something is true or false, right or wrong. Many times Americans fall into this trap. For example, some people think that certain sexual practices are justified because over 50% of the American public believes that they are permissible. We cannot determine right and wrong by majority vote.

In the past, many people believed that the Earth was flat. But just because they believed this, does it mean that the Earth was indeed flat? Does majority vote make things true or right today? Just because a great number of Americans think that abortion is acceptable, does that make it so?

In the end, we cannot determine right/wrong or true/false by majority vote. Such a thing can be decided only by legitimate reasons and evidence.

Appeal to Tradition: This fallacy occurs when one appeals either to what is old, or to what is new in the attempt to establish the truth.

Someone may appeal to what is traditional. “We have always done it this way, it must be right.” However, there may be a better way. More often today, we hear an appeal to the modern . “We moderns don’t believe in the existence of God. That was for ages past when people believed in mythology.” Merely because something is old or new does not make it right or true.

ASKING QUESTIONS 6

Francis Scott Key, the man who penned the words of the Star-Spangled Banner , was also a great Christian apologist. He once wrote, “I do not believe there are any new objections to be raised to the truth of Christianity. Men may argue ingeniously against our faith, but what can they say in defense of their own?”

Mr. Key understood a profound, yet little known principle of defending the Christian faith: the best defense is a good offense. Both sides of an issue should be able to defend their position. We need to practice making our opponents 7 stand up for what they believe, and the best way to make them defend their position is by asking strategic questions.

The strategy of asking questions is a powerful one, but it must be done with the correct demeanor. We must always question the ideas presented, although we should be careful not to challenge the authority of the professor.

In addition, we must keep in mind that if we ask questions of others, they will likely ask questions of us. That means that while we want to challenge other people to defend their beliefs, they will challenge us as well. We need to know why we believe what we believe.

By asking questions we engage in worldview apologetics. We are able to go beyond someone’s appearance or behavior in order reveal and engage their worldview.

How you ask questions — the attitude revealed in your style of inquiry — will reveal whether you want to persuade someone of the truth or just win arguments. We hope that you will desire the former so that you can graciously demonstrate Christian living to unbelievers.

Asking questions is an excellent strategy for three reasons. First, it is low risk. If your opponent becomes angry or defensive at your questions, then you can simply stop asking questions, or change the subject.

Second, asking questions helps you to understand your opponent’s train of thought — where they began their thinking, how their thinking progressed, and the exact conclusion for which they are trying to argue. In other words, asking questions helps you to understand them. And understanding is a primary step in seeking to persuade people of the truth.

Third, asking questions can help someone to have a better understanding of where they stand on an issue. In other words, instead of giving them an explanation, you can cause them to think through their position more clearly.

What sort of questions should we be asking? Start with questions that strike at the heart of your opponent’s worldview. Such questions force them to back up and defend their assumptions. Along this line, we suggest a series of tough questions .

Question 1: What do you mean by that?

Always begin by asking your opponents to define their terms. If they say something like, “There is no such thing as a traditional family left in the United States today,” then ask, “What do you mean by traditional family?” If they say “God cannot exist because there is too much evil,” then ask, “What do you mean by evil ?” 8

Question 2: How did you come to that conclusion?

This question is especially helpful in coming to understand how people think. You can find out where their thoughts began, how they progressed, and how they arrived at their conclusion. Along the way, you can ask further questions about any of their points of reasoning.

Question 3: How do you know that to be true?

Here we are seeking an understanding of why they believe what they believe. Ask them to supply some good support for what they are claiming to be true.

Question 4: Why do you believe that you are right?

We should be ready to ask, “Why do you believe as you do?” This question forces one’s opponent to admit when they are simply assuming their beliefs and when they have actually reasoned through their beliefs. It also helps to reveal any evidence they might offer for their arguments. Christians should, in turn, always be ready to give rudimentary reasons for their beliefs on any given subject.

Question 5: Where do you get your information?

Students should be trained to ask, “Where do you get the information to prove that what you are saying is true?” This question can help distinguish between mere hearsay and documented data.

Question 6: What happens if you are wrong?

Nobody likes to think about the consequences if what they believe is wrong. Yet there have been some outstanding examples of people who were willing to do just that. One such person was Blaise Pascal, a brilliant mathematician, known for his famous wager. It goes something like this: “If I become a Christian and live my life in the service of mankind, and then die only to find out that Christianity is not true, I will have lost nothing. But if I do not become a Christian and live my life selfishly, and then die only to discover that Christianity is true, I will have lost everything.” Pascal’s wager is a direct way of asking, “What do I have to lose if I am wrong?” 9

Question 7: Can you give me two sources that disagree with you and explain why they disagree? 10

College professors often hold to one position very strongly against all others. In class, they may assert, either implicitly or explicitly, that what they believe to be true is the objective truth. Therefore, they may give little or no merit to any disagreements, or they may even ridicule their opponents. The astute Christian student will ask such professors to explain clearly the opposing viewpoints, along with good documentation, and then explain why they disagree. In this way, you can see if your professors have weighed different sides of the issues and made informed decisions. The professor has two options: give the merits of the opposing side (thus demonstrating to the class that his is not the only way to think about the issue), or, admit that he has not studied the opposing viewpoints, and has thus made an uninformed decision without weighing all the available information.

Question 8: Why is this significant?

Many professors will fail, unless challenged by students, to provide the connection between their worldview and the point they are making. For example, if they claim “people are basically good, not sinful, by nature,” you might ask why this point is significant. This might prompt them to explain that this justifies another view, maybe a socialistic view of the world, or elimination of the need for a savior.

Question 9: How do I know you are telling me the truth? 11

If the opponent has any hidden agenda, it will surface at this point. We should not trust someone simply because he has a Ph.D. after his name. People are fallible, and we all make mistakes. Remember, the Bereans were nobler because they checked the Apostle Paul against the Old Testament (Acts 17:11). A poor professor will respond simply by listing his or her qualifications. A good professor will say “Don’t take my word for it. Go check it out for yourself.”

Question 10: Can you give me an alternate explanation for this phenomenon?

This is a good way to move a discussion back onto logical ground. Many individuals will emotionally assert things like, “His budget cuts are responsible for all of the economic ills in this nation.” This is an absurd generalization, something that will become evident when asking this question.

ANALYZING MEDIA REPORTS

People need to recognize that most of their information about the world comes to them through the media. Yet, the media isn’t some massive channel that simply dumps unbiased facts into our laps. As we have seen, everyone has a worldview: the actors in a news story, the experts who comment on it, the reporters of the story, even the editors/executives who decide which story to cover. Each of their worldviews has an impact on the information that eventually reaches you.

At times, the influence of a particular worldview may be subtle. However, it wouldn’t take very long to discover that many of them don’t just have a job; they have a mission. Their mission is to make a difference in the world through what they do. In fact, for many people, this is not an unusual goal. Students needs to be aware that we all approach information and life with a bias. It is simply unavoidable.

In the vast majority of cases, the editors and reporters are making an effort to be balanced. Yet what does balanced mean? It means reporting both sides of the issue with no indication that either side of the story has more merit. Is that true? As Christians, we believe that some things are right and other things are wrong.

As one learns to analyze media reports, he or she should apply the rules on logical thinking that are presented in this section. They should also keep the following factors in mind:

1. What is reported?

It is easy to think that by reading your daily newspaper and watching the evening news you have received a thorough representation of anything relevant in your community. Students should realize that each media outlet has a limited amount of space and ability to deal with everything that is important. Think of a media outlet as a spotlight on a dark night. The spotlight will illuminate things that you would never see otherwise, but there is no way it can shine on everything at once.

Recognize also that each individual news form has restrictions and limitations. In order to make a story acceptable for television, it must have pictures. This may seem inconsequential until you realize that there are some things — like the arrival of a new bear at the local zoo — which are reported because they make great pictures and can be reported in two minutes. Yet perhaps the same day the bear arrived, the city council made a change in the zoning laws that will affect your school. City council meetings make horrible pictures, and zoning laws don’t fit well into concise sound bites. Which story is truly important?

What makes an event newsworthy? Most events that are truly life-changing are not considered newsworthy: marriages, deaths, and births. Rarely do these events appear on the front page. Conversely, many events that make the front page are life changing for only a few people, or intriguing for the moment.

2. Which sides are presented?

Is a response from each side presented? Does the news story even indicate that someone might think differently? For instance, in an article in the Chicago Tribune , “Life Gets Earlier Date of Origin,” 12 an Australian scientist is reported as having found that life evolved much earlier than was previously thought — going from chemical soup to living cells in just 500 million years, rather than 1 1/2 billion years. The article is well written, and acknowledges disagreement within the scientific community. However, it does not acknowledge that anyone might disagree with evolution altogether.

There are many reasons for this type of omission. Sometimes it is deliberate. At other times, a reporter may not be aware that another viewpoint exists or know a credible contact to represent a position. Also, there may not be time to consider another opinion due to deadlines.

Another reason for omitting a position on an issue is based on worldviews. How we think will affect what we believe to be credible, or even possible. For example, we know that the world is round, but some people still believe it to be flat. If you were going to write an article examining a change in a major ocean current and its effect on weather, would you contact the Flat Earth Society for comment?

In the same way, a reporter who firmly believes that the material world is all that exists may do a human-interest piece on a miraculous recovery from cancer. Although they might mention the chance that there might be a supernatural element involved, a natural cause of recovery will be sought and favored. The reporter knows that there is no way God could have healed the patient, so this possibility is as absurd as the idea of a flat Earth.

3. What is the tone of the report?

Does the tone of the writing or speaking carry meaning in itself? Does the tone match the issue being reported? Consider the following example from an article concerning the ethical discussions raised by the movie Indecent Proposal (where a billionaire offers another man 1 million dollars for one night with his wife). The reporter spoke with a woman who is shocked by the number of women who would agree to take the money and sleep with the man. The reporter is writing in the first person.

“I was really shocked,” she said. “I think these people are telling the truth. Kidding is one thing, but this was a serious discussion. I love my husband. This would never even be cause for five minutes of deliberation. I would never do it. I can’t believe they would.” She talks as if this is going to go on record as the final rip in modern morality. “And what do you think?” she wanted to know. The woman is 53 years old, the grandmother of three. And by her own admission, she is 35 pounds overweight. I told her I could see how this would be a great moral challenge. But I thought she had the strength to get through it. “I think you can go back to worrying about Somalia, the economy and whether Donald will marry Marla,” I said. “I just don’t think this is going to come up.” “That’s not the point,” she said. “Yes, it is,” I replied. 13

4. What underlying assumptions does the news story hold?

Students should become skilled in seeking underlying assumptions held in the report of a story.

The Twin Cities Star Tribune ran an article entitled, “If every kid cared, the world would change,” 14 describing the impact of a few sixth graders concerned about the environment. The piece is inspiring, but the assumption is that it is permissible to do whatever is necessary to make your point (the children disobeyed school officials in holding a protest, and were suspended from school). This disobedience was presented in a positive light.

5. Who are the sources and how are they characterized?

Does an article on environmentalism only quote extremist groups, or do they use more moderate sources? If the article quotes Christians, which groups or spokespersons are quoted? Are these the best sources? Why were these sources used? Consider also how the sources are characterized or described. Are they seen in a positive or negative light? The following quote is from an Associated Press article reporting on several Italian towns that banned bikinis on city streets.

ROME (AP) — . . . Limits on topless bathing or skimpy suits on city streets are not new. But this time the prudery illuminates attitudes about a political force that has arrived like an awkward adolescent shouldering his way onto the school bus. The prudish officials belong to the Northern League, a regionally based anti-corruption party backed by small businessmen and the middle class, with upright morals to match.

The bans reflect the culture clash between the League and its rivals from traditional parties, particularly on the left, which regard the League as part of a conservative backlash. 15

6. How are words used to describe people or organizations?

To describe the incident: Was someone taken to jail or thrown into jail?
To describe the people involved: A local church or a fundamentalist religious group ? 16
To describe a position: Is someone pro-life or anti-abortion ?
To convey emotion: One article described citations by the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression. The organization cited the Federal Communications Commission for censorship for ” . . . trying to gag controversial radio personality Howard Stern . . . ” 17 Censorship and gag are emotional words, and convey meaning.
To give positive or negative connotations: “Focus on the Family, the Christian media conglomerate, should be upfront about its ‘extreme and un-American’ political agenda, a national civil liberties watchdog group said Wednesday.” 18 Think of the words with generally positive connotations: civil liberties and watchdog . Negative connotations come from the words agenda and conglomerate .

To simply describe a thing: A fascinating example of this comes from an article titled “Drs. try to save brain-dead mom’s fetus.” The baby is referred to as a fetus throughout the article, except when a hospital spokesman is quoted as saying, “The odds are very slim, but the baby’s heart is beating.” 19

Or, consider Colorado’s Amendment Two, which would prevent laws giving gays protected civil rights status such as those that protect minority groups. Contrast that description with, “the amendment would ban laws that prevent discrimination against homosexuals,” 20 as it was described by the Associated Press.

Even punctuation can be used to convey meaning. In the following examples, a prayer rally is presented as something a bit odd, if not downright unsavory.

Abortion clinics brace for Operation Rescue
Saturday ‘prayer rally’ set for Robbinsdale
Operation Rescue officials confirmed Wednesday that their national director, the Rev. Keith Tucci, will be in the Twin Cities this weekend and will lead a “prayer rally” in front of a Robbinsdale abortion clinic on Saturday. 21

7. How are actions described?

What are the outcomes or results of the event being reported? Are these accurate? Consider an article entitled, “Teaching multicultural history instills pride, sense of place, educators find.” 22 The results of implementing presenting a multicultural curriculum are presented as overwhelmingly positive. However, the writer does not examine the results of this curriculum on the students’ standardized test scores. The program has raised self-esteem, but is that the only crucial criteria for evaluation?

8. What statistics are used?

Statistics can prove just about anything — and they can be misleading. A prime example is the accepted statistic that homosexuals comprise 10% of the population. 23 Recent studies indicate that 2-3% is more appropriate, 24 yet the 10% figure continues to be used.

9. What is left out of the news story?

This can include background sources, supporting materials or studies, and opposing viewpoints. Sometimes this omission is deliberate. However, in many cases it is simply irresponsible reporting. For example, consider the following news brief that was sent on the United Press International newswire:

(TRENTON, N.J.) — Some 15 million people could be getting parched if there is more global warming without an increase in rainfall. The U.S. Geological Survey says the Delaware River Basin which feeds Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York could be facing a serious drought if the overall temperature rises by just four degrees. That would cause stream flow to drop 27 percent and allow saltwater to back up in the Delaware into freshwater aquifers. 25

That is the entire story! Almost every possible detail was left out — why the U.S. Geological Survey said what it did, any supporting statistics or studies, or support for the controversial idea of global warming in general. This example also begins with the faulty assumption that global warming is already occurring, and points out the inherent difficulties in reporting news. This news clip was intended for a radio broadcast which leaves very little time for in-depth information. Also, notice all the conditional words, could , if , etc . . .

10. Where is the reader or listener led into faulty reasoning?

Consider the following example from United Press International:

MALDEN, Mass. (UPI) — The state Board of Education Tuesday approved a policy that encourages local school officials to implement programs to protect gay students from harassment and educate faculty members about gay issues. The policy believed to be first [ sic ] of its kind in the nation, was approved as part of an overall strategy intended to curb an increasing level of violence in schools, which in recent months has included the fatal shootings of a student and a librarian. The board, however, stopped short of recommending a gay studies curriculum to be offered in the public schools. 26

Unless the reader is thinking critically, he might assume the shootings cited in paragraph 2 were gay related — not so. The reader is led to assume that with increasing violence, gays will need protection.

TAKING ACTION

One of the difficulties with analyzing media reports is that the more you think critically, the more critical you become. It will become much harder to simply absorb the news. There are some positive actions you and your class can take to promote a more balanced approach to the news in your area. One key action is to make sure your local media outlets have access to credible sources. Gary Bauer, of the Family Research Council, is quoted often in secular media simply because he is one of the few people they know to contact for the “conservative Christian” viewpoint.

One of the best ways to do this is to distribute a media guide to all your local news sources. Find spokespeople on a variety of topics: women’s issues, the family, religion, education (private schools, Christian education, home school), abortion, etc. Make sure your spokespeople are reasonable and articulate — choose carefully. Be sure to include teens from your school who are willing to be interviewed. List the topics and spokespersons — including addresses; day and evening phone numbers; and a short biography to lend credibility.

Send the media guide with a cover letter to all newspapers, and radio and television stations in your area. They may or may not use it, but it will be kept on file. A reporter always appreciates a source who can be reached when a deadline is looming, and is willing to speak up in a manner that is easily quotable.

Also, begin to think of good stories for your local media. Some of the community service projects your class is doing could make a great “warm fuzzy” story. Let them know.

If your local newspaper or television station doesn’t have a “teen council” composed of students from area high schools — find a couple of interested students who would be willing to make the suggestion and serve on the council. Council members could serve as a sounding board on community issues affecting youth, be reporters, and take turns writing a weekly or daily “teen editorial.”

Of course, there are “hard passages” in the Bible (cf. 1 Peter 3:15ff. to see that even Peter could acknowledge that). If you have questions about such difficult passages, we recommend Gleason Archer’s book, New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties .
A lie is a contradiction of the truth. It is a denial of reality.
Of course, there are some people who still insist that such dichotomous thinking is incorrect. If it is not correct, however, then that means there is such a state as being correct. That then poses a dichotomy. They can’t escape the nature of reality.
The Apostle Paul warned the early Church about those who would teach a different Jesus and a different gospel (see 2 Corinthians 11:2-4,13-15; Galatians 1:6-9; see also 1 John 4:1-6). For a good survey and theological refutation of various pseudo-Christian religions, see Defending the Faith by Richard Abanes (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1997).
This is not to say that the objects being compared do not share points of commonality; rather it is to say that points being compared to support the conclusion are not supported by the analogy.
Special thanks to Bill Jack and Jeff Myers for help on earlier editions of this material. Both Bill and Jeff are great examples of how to live inquisitively.
By opponent, we mean the person of whom you are asking questions. It does not mean your enemy.
To combat this particular argument, you can ask by which standard do they judge between good and evil. Keep in mind that atheists have no final universal standards by which to judge between good and evil. The existence of evil is actually a good argument for the existence of God. In the end, if God does not exist, then there is no such thing as evil either.
Be careful with this question because it can always be thrown back at you.
Another way of asking this question is, “Can you give us some sources who disagree with your opinion, explain their positions, and tell us what is wrong with their views?”
Another way of asking this question is, “Why should I believe you?” But you really need to be careful here. It is difficult to ask this question in a way that doesn’t seem snobbish.
“Life Gets Earlier Date of Origin,” Chicago Tribune , Sunday, May 2, 1993, Section 1, Page 28.
“Premise of ‘Indecent Proposal’ Disturbing,” Maryln Schwartz, Dallas Morning News in Colorado Springs, CO Gazette Telegraph , 4/26/93, p. D2.
“If every kid cared, the world would change,” Twin Cities Star Tribune , 4/22/93, p. 1B.
“Bikini ban in 2 Italian cities underlines new cultural clash,” Standard Examiner , Ogden, UT, 7/20/93, p. 5A.
Be aware of the use of the word “fundamentalist.” It is being applied indiscriminately to any religious group, whether a local church is protesting the location of an adult bookstore or David Koresh’s Branch Davidian cult near Waco, Texas.
“Official’s ban of fairy tale earns ‘citation’ for censorship,” The Clarion-Ledger , Jacksonville, MS 4/14/93, p. 12A.
“Watchdog says Focus hides aims,” D’Arcy Fallon, Gazette Telegraph , Colorado Springs, 4/29/93, p. B1.
“Drs. try to save brain-dead mom’s fetus,” The Commercial Appeal , Memphis, TN, 4/24/93, p. A4.
“Amendment 2 Boycott,” Associated Press newswire, 5/7/93.
“Abortion clinics brace for Operation Rescue,” Tim Nelson, Pioneer Press , St. Paul, MN, 4/22/93, p. 1A.
“Teaching multicultural history instills pride, sense of place, educators find,” Sandy Kleffman, San Francisco Chronicle , in Colorado Springs, CO Gazette Telegraph , 4/19/93, p. D2.
Kinsey, Alfred C., et al., Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (Philadelphia: Saunders Company, 1948).
Reinisch, June M., dir., The Kinsey Institute New Report on Sex (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1990), p. 147. See also Abraham Maslow and James M. Sakoda, “Volunteer Error in the Kinsey Study,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 47 (April 1952), pp. 259-62.
First-Pennsylvania News in Brief, UPI newswire, 5/18/93, 3:19 am, EDT.
“Mass. Board of Education approves policy on gay students,” UPI newswire, 5/18/93 3:23 pm EDT.

IMAGES

40 Bible Verses about Critical Thinking
Pin on Think Tank
Critical Thinking Bible: Problem-Solving Skills
40 Bible Verses about Critical Thinking
Bible & Critical Thinking
‎CRITICAL THINKING BIBLE: Problem-Solving Skills Effective Decision-Making Improve Your

VIDEO

A Personal, Informal Message To Help Jehovah's Witnesses
The CORRECT Way to Read the Bible?? #atheist #deconstruction #exchristian
Learning from Atheists: Strengthening Our Christian Faith
Watchtower Study
The Critical Importance of Biblical Literacy
Bearded Bible Thinker

COMMENTS

What does the Bible say about critical thinking ...
A critical thinker is skeptical when he or she approaches new information but intends to discover the truth. In 1 Thessalonians 5:21, God commands us to “test everything, hold fast to what is good.”. The Greek word for “test” is dokimazo, which also means “examine” or “prove.”.
What Does the Bible Say About Critical Thinking? - OpenBible.info
20 Bible Verses about Critical Thinking Proverbs 14:15 ESV / 112 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful The simple believes everything, but the prudent gives thought to his steps.
The 7 Checks of Critical Thinking - Answers in Genesis
They all come down to three rules of critical thinking: Don’t panic when you hear a faith-challenging message. God’s Word is true, so anything that contradicts it must be false. Break the message down with the “7 Checks of Critical Thinking.”
Critical Thinking: The Secret Weapon of Confident Christians
Paul warned in Colossians 2:8, “Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ” (NLT). We are exhorted by the apostle Paul to “Test everything; hold fast what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21).
40 Bible Verses about Critical Thinking – Verse And Prayers
These 40 Bible verses underscore the importance of critical thinking in the pursuit of wisdom and truth. They emphasize intellectual humility, the search for understanding, reasoning in faith, and valuing knowledge.
A Biblical Foundation for Critical Thinking - Reasons for Hope
Paul’s exhortation to the Thessalonians includes very practical applications for critical thinking. First, EVERY idea should be subjected to critical analysis (testing). Second, critical thinking helps distinguish between good and evil.
Jesus: The Master of Critical Thinking | Reasons for Hope
Understanding Jesus, the Thinker, and his use of powerful arguments can turn out to be invaluable in todayâ€™s hostile world. The gospels dedicate an enormous amount of time and space describing how Jesus engaged the arguments and responded to the attacks that were launched against his truth claims.
Critical Thinking and Christianity | Canadian Bible Guy
Even the Bible, which promotes faith, also promotes critical thinking. The greatest command of all is to “love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength” (Luke 10:27). The centre of Christianity is, in part, loving God with your mind. There is a thinking aspect to faith.
Critical Thinking and Commentaries – Biblical Interpretation ...
Critical Thinking and Commentaries. There are several reasons one wants to read a commentary last when studying the Bible. When one interprets the scriptures he or she needs to: identify the complete thought of the passage; examine the content of the passage; examine the context of the passage; outline the story, argument, or poetic structure ...
Critical Thinking - Summit Ministries
In the following essay, we will briefly discuss the nature of an argument, the law of non-contradiction, and a selection of informal fallacies. We will also present a helpful cache of tough questions, which can be used when engaging various worldviews.