Popular Christian fallacies

Have you ever noticed that once an idea becomes popular, it becomes "self-evident" to many and those who believe in it don't bother to check its accuracy?

Well, I thought it would be an idea to list a few of the fallacies of this kind that I've come across. Please don't think I'm being negative towards my fellow-believers here - this seems to be a universal phenomenon, not just restricted to Christians, and I've been as "guilty" as anybody else at times.

Not all of these are exactly of earth-shattering importance - whether the apostle was named Saul, Paul or both won't exactly change my life - but they are all things that niggle because they seem to have gained popular assent without being questioned.

I'll put the fallacies in italics, and my comments in normal type.

OK, here we go.

1. Saul versus Paul

When Saul of Tarsus became a believer, his name was changed to Paul.

Actually, the Bible never says that he changed his name (or had it changed for him). The clue is that he was both Jewish and a Roman citizen (Acts 22:27). The name "Saul" is Jewish, the name "Paul" is Graeco-Roman. Both were probably his names from birth. Acts 13:9 simply notes that Saul was also named Paul, not that he changed his name. The fact that thereafter in Acts and in his letters he is referred to as "Paul" is probably due to the fact that his ministry was primarily among the gentiles, and as such he would have been more well-known by his Graeco-Roman name.

2. Science versus Religion

You can either believe in God and the Bible, or you can believe in science. The two are not compatible in any way - in fact, science is the enemy of faith.

I was in a Christian discussion on YoVille (a fun "virtual community" application on Facebook - check it out) recently, and someone asked me if I believed in science or God. He couldn't accept it when I said I believed in both, as he subscribed to the popularly-held view that the two are diametrically opposed.

Science is simply the collective name we use for the theories and inferences we draw from our observation of the world around us. For example, it is noted that things tend to fall down when dropped, so the theory of gravity is inferred from that.

Science tells us what happens and attempts to explain how things happen. It deals with cause and effect. What science does not, cannot and does not claim to do, is explain why things happen, in the sense of their meaning and purpose.

If you believe, as I do, that God made this universe we live in, why should we not want to learn more about it by scientific analysis?

Yes, scientists are wrong sometimes, but the point we so often conveniently forget is this: so are Christians. Even well-known, respected ones.

3. Heaven and Earth

If we believe in Jesus, we will go to heaven when we die.

Not so. The Bible talks about the dead being resurrected and judged. It talks about believers being rewarded with eternal life. However, it does not say we will go to heaven. As far as I can see, we will be resurrected to live on the earth, which will be brought into line with God's original design plan with the final defeat of evil.

4. Bible basics

Every word of the Bible is divinely ordained, and it contains no contradictions. The divine origin and perfection of the Bible is self-evident.

This is another one that came up in a discussion on YoVille. Now, I do happen to believe that the Bible was inspired by God, but that means different things to different people. I certainly don't believe that every word was was dictated by God and I see no evidence to support that idea.

As for "no contradictions", the first thing that comes to mind is this: the genealogies of Jesus given in Matthew 1 and Luke 3. The second thing is the quite different orders of creation given in chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis. In both these cases there are some quite obvious discrepancies. Not that I believe this is a problem when it comes to understanding the important things in the Bible, but it does make the point that absolute factual inerrancy is too strong a claim to make for the Bible.

As for the divine origin and perfection of the Bible being self-evident, I've heard similar claims being made by Muslims about the Qur'an. Just saying it doesn't make it true. It is not at all self-evident, or everyone would believe it. Of course, that doesn't mean it's not true - but it doesn't, in and of itself, make it true either.

So, any comments? Does anyone else have any popular fallacies to add to the list?