Henke 2022ac

No Circular “Proofs” from Me: Mr. Lundahl Isn’t Comprehending My Essays at All

Kevin R. Henke

September 15, 2022

As I discussed previously in Henke (2022ab), Lundahl (2022i) incorrectly accuses me of using a “circular proof” and stating that miracles are impossible:

If anyone is circular in proof it is Henke: he uses impossibility of miracles to prove the Gospel story is un-historic, then non-historicity of story to prove this no verified exception to a rule excluding miracles, from ‘universal experience’ established as such only after thus excluding each exception.” [my emphasis]

He later states in Lundahl (2022i):

“Mr. Henke pretends "we cannot accept the stories as historic, since they require a supernatural being, and we cannot accept a supernatural being, since it is not proven by verified history" all the while bending arbitrarily the weight of what verifying history actually means to suit his anti-supranatural bias.

This is indeed circular proof. A fault actually existing in logic. And committed by Mr. Henke.” [my emphasis]

Again, Mr. Lundahl clearly doesn’t comprehend what I’ve repeatedly said. He’s blatantly erecting strawman arguments by attributing claims to me that I never supported or said. In Henke (2022a) and Henke (2022b):

1. I NEVER said that miracles were impossible (also see Henke 2022ae). I’ll gladly accept the existence of miracles if Mr. Lundahl or others give me the required evidence. Nothing ranks a zero on my probability curve for past events in Henke (2022b).

2. I NEVER tried to “prove” anything (Henke 2022ad). Proof is for mathematics. History and science deal with evidence and probability. As I further discuss in Henke (2022ab), Mr. Lundahl frequently and improperly talks about having “proof” and “proving” issues.

3. Believers in the Bible have the burden of evidence to demonstrate that the Talking Snake, the claims in the gospels and other Bible stories are historical. I don’t have to demonstrate that they’re likely lies or misinterpretations because those are the most probable explanations for any far-fetched story. Skepticism is the default position with any claim about the past whether in geology or human history (Henke 2022dv). Those that want to promote a far-fetched story have to come up with good evidence for it.

4. History cannot demonstrate the existence of the supernatural or supernatural beings. Testing for the existence of the supernatural has to be done under strict and present conditions (my resurrecting the cat proposal in Henke 2022b).

5. I’m an agnostic about God. I never said that “we cannot accept a supernatural being.” To be exact, I’ve never “pretended” or said anything close to what Mr. Lundahl accuses me of in Lundahl (2022i) when he wrote: "we cannot accept the stories as historic, since they require a supernatural being, and we cannot accept a supernatural being, since it is not proven by verified history.” Mr. Lundahl needs to stop pretending that he can read my thoughts because he’s not any good at it.

6. Rather than describing me as having a “anti-supernatural bias”, Mr. Lundahl needs to realize that I have a strong bias for evidence and reality, which he does not have. He should have that bias as well rather than just accepting whatever his interpretations of the Bible say.

If Mr. Lundahl actually read what I wrote and understood my positions on the supernatural, he would never have made the above false accusations against me. Instead, he would realize that he is the one, and not me, that is using circular fallacies.