Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 9:24 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Christian Apologetics and Arguments are Futile
#1
Christian Apologetics and Arguments are Futile
One of the best ways to undermine an opponents position is to accept as much of it as they put forward, and to show that even when doing so they completely fail at establishing said position even if they're best efforts are true. I'll be doing this to Christian apologetics, and is aimed particularly at Drich, ChadWooters, Godschild and the like.


So, what are the main ways in which Christian apologetics aims to establish itself as true, or at least that its truth is an inference to the best explanation? The following arguments we're probably all familiar with.

Now, what do these arguments establish with regards to a cumulative case for Christian theism? Well as it turns out, they don't establish Christian theism, and certainly not more other monotheistic religions like Islam. Here is what they establish as true, as far as I can tell:


Cosmological arguments (specifically the Kalam): There is an ultimate, 1st, uncaused cause, who exists 'outside' space and time (whatever that actually means, if anything) and created the universe.

Ontological arguments: There is a Maximally Great Being (omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent) who exists in all possible worlds.

Teleological/design (fine-tuning argument, specifically): The universe is such that it is highly beneficial for life, a probability of which is so enormously improbable on chance as to tax the mind. Thus, the particular configuration must have been intentionally set as they are by a mind.

Moral arguments: God exists since moral realism is true, and such is only possible if God exists. I find this to be the worst argument for God's existence.

Historical argument: Establishes that there was a figure 2000-ish years ago, of whom the New Testament Gospels are ultimately about. Establishes that Jesus was executed and that his disciples had/claimed to have some sort of post-death experience of him, whether supernatural, hallucination, lied or something else. And yes, that is all it could establish in principle.

Argument from Religious Experience: Establishes that believers experience certain powerful feelings or events, which they take to be the witness and work of the Holy Spirit.


Does anyone else notice the insuperable disconnect between the philosophical arguments and the last 2 religious ones? If you establish with the first 3 that there is a Maximally Great Being who is the 1st Cause and fine-tuned the universe for life, and that there was a man 2000-ish years ago who claimed to be either a manifestation or prophet of said being (depends on your theology), and that Christians have powerful experiences that they assign to said being.

Hopefully you see it. There's no way to take the philosophical and religious arguments together to establish that they're talking about the same being, and the above arguments don't do so. The Historicity Argument can't do it in principle, since it inevitably comes down to relying on testimonies of those convinced and those decades later, none of whom can really agree on much in the way of real importance. And even if they did agree in their entirety, it can't tell you whether or not such is actually true.


Given the above that even if all the major arguments for the Christian God's existence taken cumulatively don't establish it's existence any more than other monotheisms - ignoring the fact that every one of those arguments are flawed through and through - the stance that theism (certainly Christian theism, as well Islamic) is untenable seems very defensible to me.
Reply
#2
RE: Christian Apologetics and Arguments are Futile
As a Christian, I don't care for this Apologetics bullshit since almost none of it is actually Biblical in nature.
But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, His Son, purifies us from all sin.
Reply
#3
RE: Christian Apologetics and Arguments are Futile
I would say that isn't accurate, and even if it were, inconsequential and irrelevant. They are defending beliefs they believe to be true because they're in the Bible (creatio ex nihilo, God's moral supremacy, Jesus' historicity, etc.)
Reply
#4
RE: Christian Apologetics and Arguments are Futile
Deus Ex Libro Wink
Reply
#5
RE: Christian Apologetics and Arguments are Futile
I'm not sure where the disconnect between the arguments is.

God is all powerful and thoughtful with the design of the universe, why would He not be able to come down and as great man and also be able to give believers great experiences?
". . . let the atheists themselves choose a god. They will find only one divinity who ever uttered their isolation; only one religion in which God seemed for an instant to be an atheist." -G. K. Chesterton
Reply
#6
RE: Christian Apologetics and Arguments are Futile
Quote:God is all powerful and thoughtful with the design of the universe,

Evidence, or are we simply supposed to take your fucking word for it?
Reply
#7
RE: Christian Apologetics and Arguments are Futile
(October 24, 2013 at 6:17 pm)MindForgedManacle Wrote: One of the best ways to undermine an opponents position is to accept as much of it as they put forward, and to show that even when doing so they completely fail at establishing said position even if they're best efforts are true. I'll be doing this to Christian apologetics, and is aimed particularly at Drich, ChadWooters, Godschild and the like.


So, what are the main ways in which Christian apologetics aims to establish itself as true, or at least that its truth is an inference to the best explanation? The following arguments we're probably all familiar with.

Now, what do these arguments establish with regards to a cumulative case for Christian theism? Well as it turns out, they don't establish Christian theism, and certainly not more other monotheistic religions like Islam. Here is what they establish as true, as far as I can tell:


Cosmological arguments (specifically the Kalam): There is an ultimate, 1st, uncaused cause, who exists 'outside' space and time (whatever that actually means, if anything) and created the universe.

Ontological arguments: There is a Maximally Great Being (omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent) who exists in all possible worlds.

Teleological/design (fine-tuning argument, specifically): The universe is such that it is highly beneficial for life, a probability of which is so enormously improbable on chance as to tax the mind. Thus, the particular configuration must have been intentionally set as they are by a mind.

Moral arguments: God exists since moral realism is true, and such is only possible if God exists. I find this to be the worst argument for God's existence.

Historical argument: Establishes that there was a figure 2000-ish years ago, of whom the New Testament Gospels are ultimately about. Establishes that Jesus was executed and that his disciples had/claimed to have some sort of post-death experience of him, whether supernatural, hallucination, lied or something else. And yes, that is all it could establish in principle.

Argument from Religious Experience: Establishes that believers experience certain powerful feelings or events, which they take to be the witness and work of the Holy Spirit.


Does anyone else notice the insuperable disconnect between the philosophical arguments and the last 2 religious ones? If you establish with the first 3 that there is a Maximally Great Being who is the 1st Cause and fine-tuned the universe for life, and that there was a man 2000-ish years ago who claimed to be either a manifestation or prophet of said being (depends on your theology), and that Christians have powerful experiences that they assign to said being.

Hopefully you see it. There's no way to take the philosophical and religious arguments together to establish that they're talking about the same being, and the above arguments don't do so. The Historicity Argument can't do it in principle, since it inevitably comes down to relying on testimonies of those convinced and those decades later, none of whom can really agree on much in the way of real importance. And even if they did agree in their entirety, it can't tell you whether or not such is actually true.


Given the above that even if all the major arguments for the Christian God's existence taken cumulatively don't establish it's existence any more than other monotheisms - ignoring the fact that every one of those arguments are flawed through and through - the stance that theism (certainly Christian theism, as well Islamic) is untenable seems very defensible to me.
I know the OP has seen this already, but here is a video by DeistPaladin (A user here)


To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Reply
#8
RE: Christian Apologetics and Arguments are Futile
(October 28, 2013 at 5:59 pm)GodsRevolt Wrote: I'm not sure where the disconnect between the arguments is.

God is all powerful and thoughtful with the design of the universe, why would He not be able to come down and as great man and also be able to give believers great experiences?

The Purple Space Monkey is all powerful and thoughtful with the design of the universe, why would It not be able to come down as an invisible fairy and put happy-bubbles in the soul believers so they can do the Monkey Dance of Joy?

See the problem? I've just made up a bunch of stuff. Whether I believe in it, or whether I can convince a billion others to believe their experiences are related to it, is irrelevant.
Reply
#9
RE: Christian Apologetics and Arguments are Futile
(October 28, 2013 at 5:59 pm)GodsRevolt Wrote: God is all powerful and thoughtful with the design of the universe

We should get you in a debate with John V. He claims that God is not all powerful.
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.
Reply
#10
RE: Christian Apologetics and Arguments are Futile
(October 28, 2013 at 8:35 pm)bennyboy Wrote:
(October 28, 2013 at 5:59 pm)GodsRevolt Wrote: I'm not sure where the disconnect between the arguments is.

God is all powerful and thoughtful with the design of the universe, why would He not be able to come down and as great man and also be able to give believers great experiences?

The Purple Space Monkey is all powerful and thoughtful with the design of the universe, why would It not be able to come down as an invisible fairy and put happy-bubbles in the soul believers so they can do the Monkey Dance of Joy?

See the problem? I've just made up a bunch of stuff. Whether I believe in it, or whether I can convince a billion others to believe their experiences are related to it, is irrelevant.

Yes I do, I do see the problem, you have shed light on this and the problem is you. That's the most ridiculous thing I've seen.

GC
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Good Arguments (Certainty vs. Probability) JAG 12 938 October 8, 2020 at 10:30 pm
Last Post: Sal
  Best arguments for or against God's existence mcc1789 22 2718 May 22, 2019 at 9:16 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Are Atheists using Intellectually Dishonest Arguments? vulcanlogician 223 28104 April 9, 2018 at 5:56 pm
Last Post: KevinM1
  Arguments for God's Existence from Contingency datc 386 41282 December 1, 2017 at 2:07 pm
Last Post: Whateverist
  Valid Arguments for God (soundness disputed) Mystic 17 2037 March 25, 2017 at 2:54 pm
Last Post: brewer
  Pressuposition Apologetics Cross Examined Soldat Du Christ 48 5144 October 19, 2016 at 1:27 pm
Last Post: Mister Agenda
  Arguments for God from a purely philosophical perspective Aegon 13 2861 January 24, 2016 at 2:44 am
Last Post: robvalue
  Hume weakened analogical arguments for God. Pizza 18 5886 March 25, 2015 at 6:13 pm
Last Post: Pyrrho
  Gaps in theistic arguments. Secular theism vs religious theism Pizza 59 10511 February 27, 2015 at 12:33 am
Last Post: The Reality Salesman01
  Using the arguments against actual infinites against theists Freedom of thought 4 2236 May 14, 2014 at 12:58 am
Last Post: Freedom of thought



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)