Apologetics...I'm a BIG Fan

[The Grand Nudger]

I have a favorite.

TOMAS DE TORQUEMADA'S ARGUMENT
(1) See this bonfire?
(2) Therefore, God exists.

[LunchBox]

do you have a particular favorite christian apologist lunchbox?

Is there a difference between any of them? I do find Ray Comfort to be the most fun. He sounds like an elementary school counselor, and his fluffy egocentric infallibility is so obnoxious, it's almost charming.

[weakagnostic]

I was just thinking when there are Christian apologetics is there such a thing as Muslim apologetics or any other religions apologetics? That would be an interesting debate.

[Minimalist]

Just listen to the muslim nuts explain how the moon really did split in half. That's always a good one.

[The Grand Nudger]

Sometimes the only way out of a lie is to come up with bigger, more impressive lies.

[LunchBox]

Goddamnit if I have to read/hear the kalam cosmological argument one more time...my fucking eyes are going to bleed.

Steven Hawking can't make philosophical statements based on 50+ years of diving into the heaviest scientific problems ever dreamed of...but some PhD in philosophy derides him for stepping into HIS realm. What a crock of egotistically superior, pretentious, BULLSHIT. Yet...apologetic-drones can spew forth their memorized bullshit, whoring out science as a justification for their goddamn fairytale...then get pissed when you utter the word "hypocricy".

---

Sorry...may have to edit for language, but I'm irritated as hell right now at how boldy stupid some people not only are...but seek to be.

[Jackalope]

I apologize in advance if this doesn't come out coherently. I drink maybe one or two nights a month, and that night is tonight.

Pure reason is useful to explore thought experiments where empirical inquiry is (currently) of limited use. Yet, it's usefulness is limited - and if reason leads you to conclusions that can't pass the giggle test, then you shouldn't take your conclusions too seriously without something concrete to back them up. At that point, labeling them as "truth" is... overly ambitious.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

I think the most hilarious thing I have ever heard an apologetic say is "..but look at a banana! It's perfectly shaped for a human hand."

Ah,that intellectual giant, Ray Comfort.

The problem with apologists, is that some of them are quite brilliant and come up with some very subtle sophistry, which people have believed, followed ,and become dead or deaded others. EG Augustine of Hippo (354-430) came up with the concept of the just war for Christians.

[Erinome]

http://truth-saves.com/ray-comforts-evol...anana-lie/

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

Christian Apologetics is the whoring out of learned scientific principles to fit an unscientific agenda. The only thing more offensive than that, is watching Christians of reasonable intelligence foam at the mouth that they now have "scientific PROOF" for their [G]od...yet they know nothing about science, and their aura of theological appeasement lulls them into being too lazy to find out for themselves or even ask relevant questions.

The solution to this horrifying problem of apologetics is as simple as it is elegant.
It is education. Pure and simple and not even of dispellilng their filthy myths, addressing their individual twists and spins as they come, or even having our youth memorize facts.
They simply need to be educated about how the world and life work to the best of human knowledge.

The greatest fear is not the apologetics. It's the people trying to teach apologetics in lieu of the concepts the apologetics twist. The real horror isn't the apologetic twists of science to 'prove' non-science, but the politicians and community leaders who would diminish education.

The greatest tool of tyrants, con-artists, and demogauges is ignorance.