Evidence That Has Been Documented Or Documentation That Claims To Be Evidence

“Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.” – Romans 1:22

Time has a way of eroding the meaning of words. It tends to dull the edge of truth. Actually time is not the culprit, we just use time as a convenient scapegoat. Time plays a role as it records the history of thought and the downward spiral of civilization. Man gives new meaning to words in order to fit his religion of relativism. A case in point is the term documented evidence. So what happened to the original meaning of this term? Did it have a falling out with truth? Did it lose its way and become the victim of a liberal society? Has it been used so casually that its original intent has been diluted, or is it a tactic of intimidation used to silence those who oppose our views?

To document was the safe keeping of the all-important evidence. Document was the servant and evidence was the master, but all that has changed. There has been a role reversal. The word documented is almost without exception followed by the word evidence. In other words, if something is documented, it automatically becomes evidence. Take any opinion, study, or statistic you want and put the word documented in front of it and voilà, you now have documented evidence.

I started noticing this as claims were being made from every quarter on every subject. Since evidence deals with truth, how could there be so many contradicting claims all backed by documented evidence? It came to a head recently when I read an article about the ill affects of milk and how a more nutritional substitute was soymilk. So I purchased some, after all, it was documented evidence. I liked it. I decided to do a little more research by going on the web. Low and behold there was more documented evidence to the contrary saying how dangerous this milk was. Now I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I know a contradiction when I see one. Two truths cannot oppose each other unless one or both are not actually the truth. Is this another sign of relativism?

God, on the other hand, has plenty of evidence regarding His existence, and it is well documented. Listen to the words found in Hebrews 11:1 & 3, “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God.” Why does the writer use the word evidence? Romans 1:20 says, “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.” Note here that invisible things are clearly seen. The reason God uses the word understood is that He brings the evidence of His existence into the courtroom of the mind where the truth is examined. A guilty charge will be brought to bear upon any explanation that denies God as creator, however the natural mind is a clever devil. When asked from where the universe comes, many theories surface, all backed by documented evidence. So again I press the question. Is it evidence that has been documented or a theory prefaced by the word documented, thus transforming theory into evidence? God, on the other hand, holds man accountable for the unmistakable evidence of His existence and creative power. He has documented this in His Word. But isn’t this circular reasoning? Haven’t I laid the foundation for a self-defeating argument by saying that the Bible has documented a creation account; and since creation follows documented, it is now evidence? Isn’t this the very point of this article? Not at all. The Scriptures are simply employing the very argument it knows man will call upon in scientific research. NASA, for example, goes into outer space and visits Mars in hopes of finding signs of life. Signs of life are not the same as life but simply point to the existence of life, which created the design. Would they not be thrilled to find a clay pot on Mars? Signs is another word for intelligent design. The Scriptures take this logic a step further by demanding an explanation for the biggest sign of all, the universe and all that it contains, which include clay pots. So there you have it, documented evidence without diluting the truth. So what about the soymilk? It’s great in coffee. Since that has now been documented, its all the evidence you need. That’s the way I see things.

See entry entitled “Parachute Theology” posted on January 9.