Let's turn the tables. Because there's a few asinine arguments up a lot of atheists' sleeve too.
I still stand by what I said that most atheists are lovely people. But I cannot deny that there is a new breed of neo-Atheists who can hardly be called 'friendly.' They act as if the very presence of religion makes them completely miserable and bitter.Fortunately for us, many of the arguments they preach and the 'regular' atheists regurgitate are childish and lame.
Six Atheist Arguments Christians Can Easily Answer
Christians are a Bunch of Hypocrites.
I'm sorry you think that.
I'm sorry you think occasionally failing to live up to high ethical standards is the root of all evil. I happen to think having no standards at all would naturally be much more evil.
I'm happy for you that you have no convictions that you might not live up to once in a while.
I'm sorry that Christians are the only people who've ever let you down.
And I'm sorry that the only Christians you've known in your life were on TV.
Do You Know How Many Wars Have Been Fought in the Name of Christianity?
Three? Four? Ten? I know there's been a few.
How many wars have been fought in the name of everything else?
Oil? Territory? Dominance? Technology? Culture? Economics? Racism?
War predates Christianity by quite a few years. War wasn't invented for religion's sake. Religion is abused for war's sake.
Lots of other stuff besides war was done in the name of Christianity. Like ending slavery, for one. I guess if you're a wealthy southern plantation owner, I can see how that would piss you off.
Hitler Was a Christian.
Monday I pointed out that Christians sometimes like to look for a cheap shot when debating atheists by saying Hitler was an atheist. Turns out atheists like to do the same. So if Hitler was a Christian, it must mean that all Christians are harboring an extreme hatred for the world.
So if Hitler was a Christian, and therefore all Christians are like Hitler, then...
...all Muslims must be violent terrorists like Bin Laden,
and all Irish must be rampant loudmouths like Bono.
But of course, saying that would make me politically incorrect and a racist...well, maybe that first one.
The Only Thing Christians Do is Indoctrinate Kids.
I love free thinkers. I used to run into them a lot, but then I became employed. Many of them like to paint Christians as brain-washers.
Tell me, if we're so good at hypnotizing the masses, how did you escape?
I love how hippie New Age parents want their children to decide for themselves what they'll be without any parental pressure or guidance. So they dress their kids up like punks to show how much they're fighting the man, as the parents pretend to not be capitalists. Of course that desire fades as soon as their kids show any interest in becoming Republicans, Christians, CEOs of 'evil' corporations, or anything else that's not a hippie New Ager.
Besides, if you're so against indoctrination, maybe you should tell Christopher Hitchens to stop writing books.
I am a Scientist. I Take Nothing on Faith.
Good. Then quit using ridiculous arguments, Mr. Scientist.
How many things do you believe that you have actually tested using the scientific method? Have you formed a hypothesis that France exists, despite every logical thread in your being telling you such a place could not possibly exist, formulate an experiment to test the existence of France, record your findings, repeat said experiment, and correctly conclude that despite all odds and wishes to the contrary, France does indeed exist.
No you didn't. You took it on authority that your third grade teacher was not a liar. And you've been drinking science-flavored kool-aid your entire life.
I Don't Need a God to Tell Me to Be Good. I'm Good for It's Own Sake.
Good. Because if you ever failed at that, you'd be a hypocrite. That would make you the root of all evil.
I haven't touched all their arguments, and haven't even done the best job at answering them. Then again, they write books about God not existing, and this blog is a few hundred words I wrote in my spare time.
What are some of the lame arguments you've heard? I'm even more interested in hearing what was something that made you doubt Christianity when your faith and knowledge was not so strong?
37 people say amen!:
This post is really good Matt.
"Childish or lame" but thses arguments float around quite a bit.
I want my blog readers to read this.Many are from the"other" camp.
Mind if I re-produce it on my blog? I will link you and give you full credit for it and send people over too.
I read another blog. And a athiest commented on it that God was an invention of Plato...
that 's really weird. Never heard of this.
Who were the greeks worshippeg before Plato came along?
Absolutely perfect. :o)
I'm a senior at a major state university (at 49!), and I've ran into a few of these arguments lately. Just about feel like printing this page and sticking it into my backpack for the next time.
Not the first time I've read your blog, and after this, it sure won't be the last!
Hi AMrita,
I was just reading about Plato today (how bored am I? Very), but there are parallels between Platonic thinking and Judeo-Christian theology.
But that's like saying there's a link between television and what we talk about at work, of course one input will have an effect on our thinking.
Aristotle was like the neo-atheists - if I can't see/touch/smell it then it doesn't exist.
Grace and peace,
Ed
I like it! You get 800 cool points my friend :)
Not exactly your question, but I find it hardest when someone shares how a Christian (or Christians) have personally hurt them. Then I just want to hug them and tell them that just because some of Jesus's followers are jerks, that doesn't negate His goodness. But logic doesn't heal pain, does it? All I can do is apologize on behalf of all Christians for their pain, and pray that they see enough love to light their path back to God.
You know, another one I hear is that Christians are only out for power. This points to the religious right of politics, which makes me honestly a little ill myself.
The response is easy. I just ask them how many Christians they know personally that are hungry for power. Usually the answer is none, because they aren't trying to know Christians, and then it's just on to the next argument.
I really liked this post. I too will be holding onto this one. Very good writing!
"I love free thinkers. I used to run into them a lot, but then I became employed."
BOOM! Headshot.
But Obama is a Christian! Christians must be kewl now LOL. Have blogged and linked. :p
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Did you just slam Bono? Matt, I'll pray for you
;-)
I really don't like the lame argument about hateful Christians. Why is it that people who call themselves Christians are automatically assumed to actually be Christians? When they inevitably do something so against Scripture, people throw that crap in our face of "he did it, so all Christians behave like that".
Look, I can call my self a supermodel, but that doesn't make me one. If you see me looking all hawt, tall and skinny crusing a runway in Paris, then you know I'm the real deal. Same with being a Christ follower. If you see me practing forgiveness, loving my neighbor, caring for the poor, and speaking and acting in Biblical truth, then you know I'm the real deal. Otherwise, make no assumptions about what people say.
Well done, sir!
I was still digesting yesterdays and then you go and....dang...good stuff alot to think on and about....
I don't need the help of atheists to doubt the existence of God...I do a pretty good job of that on my own from time to time.
I think we are all practical atheists much of the time.
We worry. We don't trust God. We wonder where He is when things are rough.
"Lord, I believe. Help me in my unbelief."
The "free thinkers/employment" line was priceless. Keep it up my friend!
I liked this too. Just because I'm a Christian doesn't mean I'm always perfect. Whenever I make a mistake or say the wrong thing, I get called a hypocrite. :P No Chistian is perfect but I certainly strive to live Godly! :)
This is really, really good.
my personal favorite is, "God is really a myth created by intellectually inferior people who needed the comfort of a god because they weren't capable of handling what they considered the great mysteries of the world any other way. Now that we have evolved past that, it's time to give up the notion of god."
Um, yeah.
What do you say to Ayn Rand fans? She turned me into an atheist for a few years but I returned to my faith even stronger after having questioned it.
I never remember thinking there is no God--that's why it's so hard for me to understand how some people can actually believe that. Interesting post!
One other lame argument they use is comparing believing in God to believing in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.
Bart Ehrman wrote a book called "Suffering: God's Problem."
I read it for an apologetics class at my conservative Christian college, with the intent to respond to it. When i got up to give my presentation i struggled to make it seem as if it wasn't making me question my faith more deeply than ever before. He (Ehrman) used to be a Christian; in his book, he responds to all of our trite answers to suffering.
It leaves me lost. And I'm not quite sure what to do.
I love to debate. I can be a bit antagonistic from time to time, but only a little bit. The Christian V. Atheist debate is great fun, but I don't believe that my ability to respond to arguments against God do all the much to change their belief system. Instead I try to introduce people to Jesus by being His ambassador. Hard to believe France doesn't exist when you've met the ambassador to France.
Great comments!
To Elizabeth: what do I say to Ayn Rand fans? I love 'Anthem,' one of my favorites, a brilliant work. Like many books, it was too long towards the end because she's so dang persistent in pounding in her point. What is her point, and the ultimate point of all her literature?
That we are all our own gods.
Which to me doesn't sound altruistic, ethical, un-hypocritical, or any of the other adjectives any atheist would like to describe himself with.
The other thing that bugs me about atheists is that they deny the fact that a former atheist could now believe in God. I actually had someone say to me when I mentioned I used to be an atheist: "clearly you hadn't been a real atheist then." Really? Sort of felt that way to me for close to three decades.
I once took a philosophy of religion course. This of course was when I was a skeptic with a Christian background. I thought one of the hardest things to swallow was how can God be both omniscient and omnipotent? Technically most of the answers lead you to a conclusion that we don't have free will.
I helped keep my skepticism alive long enough to convert by hyptohosizing and writing that in order for it to happen, God had to be outside time.
I think another famous one is, "For someone so based in logic and reason, I am surprised you are a Christian."
I say to the nay say, "God's full nature is incomprehensible to human logic." I am sorry they don't see my reasoning in my belief. Oddly I found that a lot of the skepticism and critics help me run towards the believing.
Perhaps it's logical that God is illogical.
Good thing atheists don't want to indoctrinate our kids....
Great post! You make me think.
Got a radical idea. Let our atheist friends become 'Bruce the Almighty ' for a week and they will have no problem believing.
Hi Ed , thank you for talking to me.
I will come over to your blog too.
I'm sorry, I liked your last blog and was with you on this one up until the scientist part. Your understanding of science is flawed and seems to be based on the "5 senses" comment you posted last time. "Running an experiment" is not part of the scientific method. When you create a hypothesis, for example France exists, there is no way to directly test this hypothesis without using your 5 senses. The same is true for the hypothesis DNA exists - it cannot be tested directly. However you can get around it by creating testable PREDICTIONS. For example, for DNA, you can predict that if DNA does exist, then traits should be inheritable, and you can design an experiment to test this. The ultimate result is that your predictions will either support or refute your hypothesis, giving you multiple lines of evidence to make a decision. I never actually see, hear, touch, taste, or smell DNA, but I can say with some certainty that it does exist. At least until new evidence comes along.
In the case of France, I can also generate multiple lines of evidence. Can I get a flight to France? Have I ever met someone from France or who has visited France? Do I see France on a map? When I turn on the TV do I see French people on the news or in sports? Multiple lines of evidence support that France does exist, and so I assert the hypothesis is supported without having to use my 5 senses to directly prove it. And so, despite the fact that I was told in grade school that it exists, that fact has been reinforced by multiple lines of evidence.
The flaw in the scientist argument doesn't lie in the fact that the person believes in things they haven't "tested". Rather, the flaw is in the fact that they ignore the lines of evidence that could suggest that God does exist. Of course, the problem here is that there are other explanations for each of those lines of evidence. Which simply brings us back to your original post the other day where you correctly stated that nobody can prove OR disprove that God exists.
@Anonymous, thank you for helping me out and strengthening the argument. My understanding of the scientific method is what I teach students: form a hypothesis, test the hypothesis (experiment), observe results, duplicate test. Form a conclusion. Is it elementary? Probably. That's why I need help.
Outstanding post.
I think evil is the hardest thing to explain but Del Tackett in the Truth Project pointedly remarks that the atheist has more trouble than the Christian with the question, "Where did evil come from?"
This is my first visit to your blog. I'm glad I stopped by. Pretty good post, and I'm digging your blog name.
Stay blessed...john
Suffering is the hardest thing for me to understand. It's an old standard argument, but I have no real answer for "If God is so good, then why is there so much suffering in the world." I know, God can work all things to good, and I know that evil in the world is because of free will. I understand that, but those arguments are so awful in the face of true suffering.
It hasn't made me doubt God, but that's the one that when I suffer, all I can do is hold on to Him. I can't explain it to anyone else, and I certainly can't explain their suffering to them.
I think for me in my atheist days, I really did not even think much about Christianity one way or the other. I was a live-and-let-live person, and I just had no reason to believe that there was a God or to want to search out that answer. I was happy as I was. I also think that perhaps subconsciously I might have had some "issues" with the fact that my children were handicapped had I thought that there was a God who could have prevented that. Thinking that these things happen, that nature is what nature is and genes are what genes are, made it easy for me to accept my kids as they were. So, my conversion clearly had to be a "hard" conversion, one where God took the lead, and I have since reconciled the issue of the handicaps as not really being issues at all. But you are right; there are atheists who feel compelled to convince believers that they are wrong. I just was not one of them.
Whack whack whack! No strawman is safe around you Matt!
Tell you what, when you're done arguing with the atheists in your head, why don't you try answering the arguments that are actually being made out there.
why can't xians understand that they are themselves atheists? (Unless, of course, they also believe in Zeus, Dionysus, or any of the 100+ g0ds that have "existed." Oh. Yeah. Those g0ds aren't real.) Do some research, and you'll discover- like me- that you're just delusional with your imaginary friend in the sky.
Wow. Every sentence of this garbage drips with intellectual dishonesty and fallacy. Where to begin:
First and foremost you assume that the burden of proof is on the skeptic rather than the believer who is making the absurd claim. No my friend. Extraordinary claims always require extraordinary evidence.
Secondly the atheist refutations that you site are not even close to typical. "hitler was a Christian" is a true claim, but is almost never used unless the Christian tries to say that he was an atheist.
Thirdly, Christians absolutely DO indoctrinate their children. The children of Christians are told WHAT to think instead of HOW to think. They are almost never instilled with the skills of critical thinking or taught to demand evidence or ask why. Your pathetic response to this criticism "Tell me, if we're so good at hypnotizing the masses, how did you escape?" is both childish and foolish. The answer to this absurd rhetoric is simple: We asked "why?" and demanded evidence.
Your monstrosity of an argument "I am a Scientist. I Take Nothing on Faith." is laughably ignorant and typical of the Christian community. The difference between the understandings of a scientist and the nonsensical magical beliefs of the Christian is the fact that the scientific facts are demonstrable and supported by evidence, while the best Christian argument ever devised remains "Believe in Jesus or we'll burn you at the stake".
"I Don't Need a God to Tell Me to Be Good. I'm Good for It's Own Sake." It's funny because you go on to say "I haven't touched all their arguments, and haven't even done the best job at answering them". This is clearly true because you didn't even TRY to answer this one.
To TheLostRealist:
You claim that the burden of proof is on the skeptic instead of the believer. However given archeological, historical, astronomical, mathematical, and the research involved in physics, metaphysics and theoretical physics the proof points to God. In this particular case actually it requires (as many well known scientists, historians, and so forth believe) more faith to claim there is no god.Understanding the context and historical analysis of the Bible, DNA sequencing, fine-tuning of the universe, cambrian explosion and so forth are your evidence. Atheism now is based off of logical arguments dismissed under factual scrutiny. Secondly, Hitler was not a Christian, any historian and true scholar knows that, atheist or otherwise. As for Christian children being "indoctrinated"...Thats clearly an argument out of ignorance. By your logic no Christian raised would become intelligent, and if you haven't done your research trust me there are many...
You claim our beliefs are "magical", and yet if you truly hold them under scrutiny they prevail, more than that they prove. You claim to understand as a scientist does and yet you provide no proof or logical argument whatsoever. But i do agree, if our best argument ever was "Believe in Jesus or we'll burn you at the stake," we would have quite a problem. But this is clearly not the case. Instead i challenge you to actually examine fact, science, and history for what they entail, and not what your science text book once told you.
Post a Comment