One of the favorite tricks of the relativist is to use logic when it suits them, and then speak against the use of it when it defeats them. Often people will say that you cannot depend on logic since it is just man's way of thinking about anything. The amazing thing about such a statement is that it represents some person's way of thinking about something. It never ceases to amaze those who are capable of serious thought that many of those who want everything to be relative and want nothing to be absolute will use the very tools to deny the absolute that others use to advance it. However, in so doing they will cry "foul" when someone uses the kind of thinking they are using to show that they are not thinking correctly.

An Anglican clergy person, some months back, left the Anglican Church and became a Buddhist. He reasoned, that is, his logic told him, that Christianity was incorrigibly theistic and invincibly self-righteous. How did he arrive at that conclusion when he traded the religion that believes in one true God for one that has no god at all? Why, my friends, he used logic! Now the amazing thing about this is that this clergyman claimed one could not use logic, but he used it when he measured Christianity beside Buddhism and decided that Christianity was false and Buddhism was true. However, he would tell those who clung to Christianity that it was true for them but not for him. This, of course, cannot be since truth is truth for everyone. There is a group of people headquartered in England, if memory serves correctly, who call themselves The Flat Earth Society.  Is it true for them that the earth is not a sphere, but a flat object like a dinner plate, while it is true for the rest of us that the earth is a sphere? No! The earth is a sphere no matter what people believe about the matter, and it is a sphere for everyone. You see these people reject the logic that proves the earth is a sphere. They think in another way, but they are wrong, are they not? They are utterly wrongheaded!

When one rejects basic, everyday logical laws, he runs into a great deal of trouble. By so doing, one cannot even get a normal conversation off the ground. No conversation could go beyond the initial greeting. For example, there is something in logic that says that a thing is not a non-thing. It is called the law of noncontradiction, and put in the form of "A is not non-A." All this means is that if something is self-contradictory it cannot be true. We understand that and everyone, without ever thinking about it, accepts this as being true. Incidentally, this one law of logic forever destroys relativism because it is self-contradictory! It says that a thing is both true and false at the same time. That simply cannot be. With the use of this one "law of logic," we have clearly demonstrated that by proper thinking and reasoning one can determine what is truth and what is not. This is the reason the Bible places so much emphasis on "reasoning." To reject reasoning means that one simply accepts babble. That is what many relativists do today, they simply babble. The tragedy is that many others, without ever investigating what the relativist is saying, will accept it pretty much like a fish accepts a worm on a hook. There is a need to investigate. When someone told us that the world was going to end at midnight December 31, 1999, we asked for proof, and got none! Why? Because there was none!

When one says that we cannot depend on "logic," we need to ask how he arrived at that conclusion. As a matter of fact, when the relativist says that there is no such thing as logic, they must presuppose the existence of it in order to deny it! If you can deny it, it exists. For someone to make a statement does not mean that the statement is true. Relativists seem to have forgotten that you cannot reason with a person about his views if he does not use reason to arrive at them. The relativist had to use some sort of "logic" to arrive at the conclusion that one cannot use logic to prove truth. That is self-contradictory, and as such it is false!