"Bad Arguments?" a reply

[PJM]

Dishonest Apologetics
By anEvilAtheist

Page 1 of 2

First off let me acknowledge the honesty of you’re post name. Aren’t are “Atheist Evil? ** Oh, I’m sorry it‘s “all Christians that are evil!” **

You actually make some valid points. Dishonesty is a sin, and possibly, depending on the seriousness of the act and the intent to defraud, could even be a serious sin. It also shows a weak mind and weaker morals if done intentionally. One should be quick to judge actions. And far less quick in judging motives.

Actually, Christians understand that that our Creator is all “everything good-perfectly!”

Support for this argument can be made in at least to ways.

If Creation is a “First Cause” reality, and it is, then the Creator had to have (being good and being perfect) specific reasons for everything that He the Creator brought into existence from “nothing.” To not have a specific reason for creation would mean that God is somehow imperfect. The Created Universe and it’s continuing existence gives evidence that this is not the case.

The most common elements of “still-life” one assumes might be grass and trees. Both of these contribute to creating Oxygen need to sustain human and animal life. If it “was not designed” how did it come into existence, and what keeps it in existence?

One might point to the stars, even the sun and the moon, which all seem to be inanimate objects. Yet each of these serves a purpose, be it navigation, light, the tide, plant and crop growth, to name a few. So I’m not exactly sure of what you mean by “inanimate objects?” Water is needed by plant and animal life for existence.

Indeed, there was no physical exertion on God’s part, God simply (for Him) Willed into being the Universe, and the Order (laws of) of the Universe such as the sun and moon rising and setting regularly, the stars staying in place, the law of Gravity and the like. These certainly cannot be credited to mere accident, or some kind of evolution, and clearly point to a “Supreme Being” that we call God.

Another atheist argument that I think is logically flawed is the statement that because evolution can explain why people have religious beliefs, those religious beliefs must be false. If God exists, he could simply have made us this way in order to make it easier to realize that he exists. So it shows why people might believe in God even if he doesn’t exist, but it does not show that God is merely imaginary.

**

My friend how does evolution explain why people have religious beliefs? I have heard the exact opposite. That evolution gives evidence that there is no God. Which is absurd. Where did the stuff that “went bang” originate?

Another common argument is that religious people have done very bad things in the past. This does not show that their religion is false, just that members of any religion are humans, and have flaws. Both atheists and Christians have been brutal murderers and both atheists and Christians have been generous humanitarians.

Correct!

Please see next page**

 

[PJM]

Page 2 of 2

“Bad Arguments”

As an atheist, I obviously think that many Christian arguments are flawed, and I’ll mention a couple of them. Sometimes Christians say that their beliefs must be reasonable since so many people share their beliefs and atheists must be wrong since there are fewer of us. The problem is that popularity is not a good way of establishing what the truth is. Christianity is no more or less true today than it was when it consisted of a few hundred people.

Belief in a Deity, as you say is not dependent on numbers, however one should at least factor in numbers that bear relevance and significance. For example the RCC has been in continuing existence for about 2,000 consecutive years, and Pope Benedict is our 265th consecutive Pope in an Unbroken line of Popes.

The MAJORITY of current Catholic Dogma’s and Doctrines are the same today, as they were about 2000 years ago. Yes, understanding of some of these has grown, but take the Bible and the Seven Sacraments are for the most part the same today as they were 2000 years ago.

One cannot ignore these facts. Common belief and practice for such a prolonged period can only be attributed to having the TRUTH.

Unlike Buddhist and Islam who have no God, and are effectively, only a cult, Catholicism has withstood the test of time.

Catholics remain the largest group of “Christians” in the World, and despite over 30,000 non-Catholic Christian sects, this remains true, 400 years after the Protestant Revolution. One cannot blame coincidence, luck, or circumstances for this record. Additionally Many, Many Thousands, beganing with proveable historical evidence of the Apostles themselves gave their very lives in very BRUTAL ways as evidence of their belief system.

Islam does not become true if it far surpasses Christianity in adherents.

Another argument that just doesn’t work is Pascal’s Wager, which says that an atheist loses nothing if he accepts Catholicism and has everything to gain if it turns out to be true. Because of this, an atheist should supposedly try to believe. One problem is that religion isn’t completely costless (going to mass, giving money to the church). So in order for the wager to work, there must be some evidence that Catholicism is true, otherwise we should give all our money to anyone who walks up to us on the street and says that he will somehow give us infinite happiness in exchange.

Friend, the evidence exist. In fact I have shared some of it with you. Should you have specific questions, or desire proof of a specific issues (s) you need only express you’re concerns and we will address them.

Nothing in life is free, and certainly nothing in life that is good is without cost. It’s not always money, sometimes its labor, faith, charity, suffering for what you believe; Life, Liberty, the Pursuit of Happiness, and Religious beliefs. There is always some kind of price to pay. If there exist no price affixed, one should ask, is this worth anything?

Catholicism has grown from the Blood of Her Martyrs. What greater price can be paid? Catholic and Christians have done this willingly, following the Personal Example of Jesus Christ, the very Son of God, who lead by example.

The monetary cost is optional, based on ability, and reflects Charity. It certainly is no excuse to not become a Catholic!

Since there are many contradictory religions, someone would have to consider every possible religion, and pick the one with the most evidence. It would take more than one lifetime to thoroughly consider the evidence for the many thousands of religions (and only considering the most popular is not good enough). So this does not really work as a way of deciding what to believe, and it really all comes down to whether the evidence for Catholicism is enough to conclude that it is probably true.

It was for Millions

It is for over ONE BILLION today

It is the Oldest and the only Religion actually founded by a GOD! That is precisely why it is still here some 2000 years later. ONLY a God could make this the reality that it is!

Pascal’s Wager is an attempt to get people to accept weaker evidence, but it only works if people already have good enough evidence to convince them that Catholicism is probably true, in which case the wager is not needed. Another argument I sometimes hear is that someone you know was sick and recovered after you prayed for them. The reason why this doesn’t work as evidence of God is that some people will inevitably recover whether you pray for them or not. What would provide evidence of God is a study showing that people receiving prayers recovered faster than those who did not. However, so far no properly conducted study has discovered a significant effect.

Nobody’s going to fool you right?

So everyone who gets sick gets well? No, of course not. Nor does prayer guarantee that one will recover. It’s God’s decision.

Putting aside for the moment the issue of contraceptives does a pregnancy result EVERY TIME a man and women have without “protection” sexual intercourse? Of course not. Why is this? Does a women create her own fertile period? Of course not? Then who does?

Why was the Universe created? Why where you created?

If you’d care to ask, we have the answers!

Love and prayers,

Pat

 

[Eucharisted]

Another argument that just doesn’t work is Pascal’s Wager, which says that an atheist loses nothing if he accepts Catholicism and has everything to gain if it turns out to be true. Because of this, an atheist should supposedly try to believe. One problem is that religion isn’t completely costless (going to mass, giving money to the church). So in order for the wager to work, there must be some evidence that Catholicism is true, otherwise we should give all our money to anyone who walks up to us on the street and says that he will somehow give us infinite happiness in exchange.

Pascal’s Wager isn’t about Catholicism, it’s about the existence of God, whom all monotheists believe in - not just Catholics.

As far as evidence of Catholicism is concerned, it all boils down to the resurrection of Jesus Christ: If Jesus really did rise to glory, then He is God and what He said about His resurrection is true, and if He is God and what He said is true, then what He has said regarding His Church is true; but if He did not rise to glory, then all Christianity is false. (Note: Jesus had to rise to glory, to a new state of being, and not just rise from the dead)

Moreover, while one may find that Jesus did rise to glory, there is still the question of which church He founded. All churches claim to be of Christ, the true churches. Since Christ did not use the plural when He spoke to Peter, He only meant He had one Church (Matthew 16:18). So which church is the true church? It is easy to discover: All you have to do is study the history of the churches, see when they were founded. Now all the new churches of today are offshoots of older churches, which ultimately date as far back as the Reformation; however, Jesus didn’t exist during the Reformation but much, much earlier, around 30 A.D. This leaves us with two possible churches: The Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church. Which is the true church? I leave that up to you, since I can’t, without Catholic bias, tell you about the Great Schism and ecclesial history in general.

However, there is a fine line between reason and faith: reason can find evidence for something, but it ultimately cannot make the leap of faith. Hence, just as in carrying the torch one man passes the light onto another, so too, where reason stops running, it passes on the torch to faith, which completes the race.