Strong and Weak Arguments

[Neo-Scholastic]

I do think that the problem of evil carries a heavy emotional appeal, and is difficult to explain from that perspective.

Yeah, I forgot about that (duh!). And yet I personally don't see theodicy as a reason, in itself, as a strong reason for disbelief. I see it more as a puzzle, like divine hidenness. One could resolve the problem in either direction. But that is, as I say, a personal assessment.

Note: On Pascals wager.  I think this is only a weak argument when it is misunderstood as to it's purpose (which I do see theists misusing it).    It's not meant to give reason in support for God or Christianity.

Agreed. He was using it as an example to say something about statistical mathematics. But it does put the lie to those who claim that intelligent people cannot be religious. Pascal is a good counterexample to such nonsense.

If I think of anything more in the spirit of your request I'll return to post it.  But really any argument for or against god must seem ridiculous so long as "god" is regarded as meaning god only knows what.

It's okay to jut pick one particular apologetic that at least makes you stop and ponder. And likewise are there skeptical responses that make you cringe?

The point of the thread is to encourage self-reflection. In the heat of debate people often represent themselves as more confident in their stance then perhaps they truly are. We also tend to give a pass to the really bad arguments of people with whom we would otherwise agree.