The Usual Suspects: Common Apology Arguments

[GoddessOfWisdom]

Hello, everyone...I have a project that I need a little help with.

 

Exploring "teh interwebz" can be a complex and interesting experience, especially when exploring ex-christian.net and similar sites. The controversy is stimulating, informing...and repetitive. 

 

After a brief altercation with my family this morning when they caught me watching religious parody videos (sigh, my fault...I thought my sis was asleep), it has become necessary to stockpile those snappy replies -- per ExCBooster's suggestion -- for what may be an inevitable confrontation later. 

 

In short, what are the common arguments used in Christian apology/re-conversion?

To start things off...

 

 

--"No True Christian" fallacy

 

--"Pascal's Wager"

 

--"god/bible is true because god/bible" (circular reasoning)

 

--"Out of Context!"

 

 

C'mon, guys. Help me out?

[GoddessOfWisdom]

--"The Almighty Caveat"...just copped from Sybaris.

 

Thanks.

[centauri]

If I read your post correctly, you're looking for reasons to reject Christian apologetics.

You already listed several but you might also add empirical point arguments such as:

 

* Failed prophecy

* Inability to perform miracles such as healing (as specified by scripture)

* Lack of unity in Christiandom

[miekko]

Duly note, though, that 'out of context' sometimes actually is a valid argument. Us atheists and ex-christians do sometimes misrepresent what the bible says, and sometimes this misrepresenting takes the form of taking things out of context.

[pratt]

god works in mysterious ways

his way is higher than your ways

clay n potter crap

[mymistake]

Something can't come from nothing so God did it.   

 

 

God is testing you.   

 

 

Science can't tell us why we are here.

 

 

I wouldn't want to live in this world if Jesus isn't true.

 

 

I just know in my heart that it must be true.  

 

 

Take it on faith.

 

 

I have evidence but you ignore it because of your atheist faith.

[GoddessOfWisdom]

If I read your post correctly, you're looking for reasons to reject Christian apologetics.

You already listed several but you might also add empirical point arguments such as:

 

* Failed prophecy

          -Isn't this a fallacy of composition, though?  

 

* Inability to perform miracles such as healing (as specified by scripture)

          -Ok, this. THIS.

 

* Lack of unity in Christiandom

          -Maybe an inflation of conflict?

 

Yes, that's basically it. Thanks.

 

 

Duly note, though, that 'out of context' sometimes actually is a valid argument. Us atheists and ex-christians do sometimes misrepresent what the bible says, and sometimes this misrepresenting takes the form of taking things out of context.

 

Thank you. That seriously bugs me because my father was something of a self-made biblical scholar; it makes me cringe when actual out-of-context claims are made because he and I used to sit around debunking them when even a preacher or pastor made them.

 

 

god works in mysterious ways

his way is higher than your ways

clay n potter crap

 

 

All of those can be subsections under the "Almighty Caveat". Coolness. Thanks. I have always had serious issues with the 'clay and potter' meme; the "When in the course of human events..." speech comes to mind as a rebuttal.

 

 

Something can't come from nothing so God did it.   

 

        - Causal reductionism; argument from ignorance. Thanks.

 

God is testing you.   

 

        - (Fry face) Not sure if causal reductionism or circular reasoning.      

 

Science can't tell us why we are here.

 

        - That's assuming science gives a damn about answering that question. Good.

 

I wouldn't want to live in this world if Jesus isn't true.

 

       - Bully for hypothetical you. Next.

 

I just know in my heart that it must be true.  

 

      - I know in my heart that anybody who requests child-murder does not deserve worship. But again, that isn't proof. Argument from personal credulity.

 

Take it on faith.

 

     - Argument from Bullshit.

 

I have evidence but you ignore it because of your atheist faith.

 

     - First, not all exC's are athiests; fallacy of composition.

 

Thank you guys so, so much.

[ExCBooster]

If your dad's a "self-made Biblical scholar," hit him where it hurts, and dispute the worth of the whole text, by calling him on the circular argument thing. Don't let them even start to quote scripture at you, like it means anything. Tell them you don't think it DOES mean anything, but a bunch of haphazardly collected fables. There's a heap of scholarship to that effect. Check out the videos by Evid3nc3 for a rundown. There's also the extra fun question: which translation/version of the Bible, anyway, and how do you know that THAT ONE is the Word of God? Look into the history of the Bible, and you can summarily dispatch any argument that rests on the Bible as if it were actual evidence of anything other than a cultural artefact, a collection of tales. Accuse them of picking and choosing, right back.

 

Here's Leviticus 19:19.

 

Wearing blended fiber shirts? You're going to HELL. Do we really give a crap about mules and inter-cropping these days? Then why take other parts of Leviticus seriously, but not this one?

 

You mentioned several outright fallacies: no true Christian, and circular argument. Call them on it. No true Scotsman arguments are a cheap effort to move the goalposts, to suit the argument. This is clearly dishonest and outright cheating, not to mention dodging the real question. Here's an archive of fallacies, so you can spot them in the thick of the action, and call people out for them. As for circular argument, you can severely troll anyone who takes these seriously, by simply choosing an extra-irritating example, based on the same reasoning. The Bible is true because it says so in the Bible. You can reply, well, if you take that as evidence, so is the Quran. Why aren't you Muslim instead? The same reason I'm not Christian: you don't buy that reasoning, and I don't either. (The reason I go with Islam for these Bible arguments is that the Quran actually has much better scholarship, text consistency and history than the Bible does. It's just nowhere near in the same league. So, read up on Islam - it really makes a great killer argument against Biblical literalists, as a counter-example to the horrible textual train-wreck of translation, errors, and general dodginess that is the Bible. You don't have that "three persons in one God" nonsense, either. There is no God but God, period, in Islam. It's considered blasphemy of the highest order to even consider reducing God to a representation, which is why you'll never see this sort of nonsense on the ceiling of a mosque...) The reason Christians have such a problem with Islam is that they take this monotheism thing and are arguably a LOT better at it. There are, of course, lots of fun arguments against Islam, too, but you're arguing with Christians, here.

 

That's a starting point, but looking into other belief systems, and the history of the Christian one can really help. Let alone science. This is a real bird: where is your God now? Ignore the inevitable asshats in the comment section of this youtube video. There's a truckload of feathered dinosaurs, by this point. Nobody takes the "dinosaurs not ancestors to birds" thing seriously at all, unless they have a theological axe to grind. Technically, given proper bracketing, every time you see a bird, you should think: there goes a feathered dinosaur. This is a Secretary Bird, one of my favourite dinosaurs.

[GoddessOfWisdom]

If your dad's a "self-made Biblical scholar," hit him where it hurts, and dispute the worth of the whole text, by calling him on the circular argument thing. Don't let them even start to quote scripture at you, like it means anything. Tell them you don't think it DOES mean anything, but a bunch of haphazardly collected fables. There's a heap of scholarship to that effect. Check out the videos by Evid3nc3 for a rundown. There's also the extra fun question: which translation/version of the Bible, anyway, and how do you know that THAT ONE is the Word of God? Look into the history of the Bible, and you can summarily dispatch any argument that rests on the Bible as if it were actual evidence of anything other than a cultural artefact, a collection of tales. Accuse them of picking and choosing, right back.

 

 

Here's Leviticus 19:19.

 

Wearing blended fiber shirts? You're going to HELL. Do we really give a crap about mules and inter-cropping these days? Then why take other parts of Leviticus seriously, but not this one?

 

You mentioned several outright fallacies: no true Christian, and circular argument. Call them on it. No true Scotsman arguments are a cheap effort to move the goalposts, to suit the argument. This is clearly dishonest and outright cheating, not to mention dodging the real question. Here's an archive of fallacies, so you can spot them in the thick of the action, and call people out for them. As for circular argument, you can severely troll anyone who takes these seriously, by simply choosing an extra-irritating example, based on the same reasoning. The Bible is true because it says so in the Bible. You can reply, well, if you take that as evidence, so is the Quran. Why aren't you Muslim instead? The same reason I'm not Christian: you don't buy that reasoning, and I don't either. (The reason I go with Islam for these Bible arguments is that the Quran actually has much better scholarship, text consistency and history than the Bible does. It's just nowhere near in the same league. So, read up on Islam - it really makes a great killer argument against Biblical literalists, as a counter-example to the horrible textual train-wreck of translation, errors, and general dodginess that is the Bible. You don't have that "three persons in one God" nonsense, either. There is no God but God, period, in Islam. It's considered blasphemy of the highest order to even consider reducing God to a representation, which is why you'll never see this sort of nonsense on the ceiling of a mosque...) The reason Christians have such a problem with Islam is that they take this monotheism thing and are arguably a LOT better at it. There are, of course, lots of fun arguments against Islam, too, but you're arguing with Christians, here.

 

That's a starting point, but looking into other belief systems, and the history of the Christian one can really help. Let alone science. This is a real bird: where is your God now? Ignore the inevitable asshats in the comment section of this youtube video. There's a truckload of feathered dinosaurs, by this point. Nobody takes the "dinosaurs not ancestors to birds" thing seriously at all, unless they have a theological axe to grind. Technically, given proper bracketing, every time you see a bird, you should think: there goes a feathered dinosaur. This is a Secretary Bird, one of my favourite dinosaurs.

 

 

That sounds great; I don't think I'll get to use too much of it, though. 

 

I don't really see my father very often, we're separated due to domestic abuse. The main catalyst that led to my deconversion was my understanding of C-PTSD (which I'm still working on healing from) and what a healthy, non-abusive relationship is supposed to be like. My mother is the parent that I'm dealing with and she, though also intelligent, (she taught all four of us all our lives) needs a bit more gentle treatment. 

 

She didn't leave my dad until god said she could...she called it being "released". I remember the psychological torture of being kept in a scary situation because god wanted us to. Why didn't he DO something? And why would he expect us to wait on his direct permission to take ourselves out of danger...isn't that always a good thing to do?

 

My mother is hurting right now, quite a bit, learning to let go of the past. I don't think now would be the time for heavy hitting. For my rarely seen father with narcissistic tendencies -- a bit of a waste, maybe. 

 

 

 

On a side note:

 

I used to love secretary birds as a kid. Once I drew an elaborate color pencil representation of one; sadly, I think I lost it.