Dishonest Apologetics

  • Thread starter Thread starter anEvilAtheist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I listened to this talk today and it is rather interesting.

Arguments for God’s Existence ~ Peter Kreeft

peterkreeft.com/audio/08_arguments-for-god.htm

You can download it (mp3) by right clicking and clicking save file as or save link as.

“Supposed you are in a deserted island and you see the words SOS in the sand, are you going to believe that the sand made these markings?”

:blessyou:
 
anEvilAtheist said:
Thanks for your post. I’m glad you also oppose making bad arguments. I’ve heard some people say that they know a certain argument for God doesn’t quite work, but they still use it anyway in an attempt to kind of “trick” someone into belief. I strongly oppose stuff like this, just like I strongly oppose things like Zeitgeist that use lies to get people to abandon belief.

I don’t agree with your criticism of my criticism of Pascal’s Wager, so I’ll go ahead and criticize it. 🙂 You say that the situations where God does not exist “don’t matter because they result in non-existence after death.” If this life is all that I will ever have, then every second is precious. I cherish every day that I get to spend with friends and family and all the wonderful things that I have the chance to learn about the world. If there is no God, I would rather spend my free time with those I love than praying to a non-existent being. An hour or two a week adds up to quite a lot over the course of a lifetime.

But as you point out, there are certainly other problems with Pascal’s Wager. I completely agree that one can’t always choose what to believe, and that God probably wouldn’t be convinced by someone’s attempt to fake it.

It makes me think of a hypothetical. Let’s say someone had a machine that could determine exactly what I believed and offered to give me one billion dollars if I could make myself believe that invisible pink unicorns exist by the end of the year. I just don’t think there is any way I could make myself believe that.
Click to expand...
Think how freeing it is to not have to always worry about the stopwatch ticking away your short life here on Earth, and being reunited with your family and friends in the next Life.Inner Peace is one of the benefits of being a believer . 👍
 
anEvilAtheist said:
You’re right; I would not be here if I did not want to be here. I am interested in debating religion and trying to understand why people believe what they do. And yes, as long as I find conversations like this interesting, I will continue posting. Not because I want to believe, but because I enjoy the discussion.

I explained my reasons for choosing the CAF earlier in this thread:

I also know Catholicism a little better than Protestantism since more of my relatives are Catholic than Protestant.
Click to expand...
Oh… its a majority thing…

(This is simply not about trying to force yourself to believe something you don’t, or about *asking you *to try to force yourself to believe something. It is all about asking yourself why you are interested in this subject in the first place. About realizing that that interest is real, has a real source, that, if there is really a real answer it can really really be found by anyone, and, that that interest provides the motive force or reason to continue on what really is a wild idiotic senseless venture; this ties in perfectly with the Catholic teaching from Christs’ own lips; seek and you shall find, ask and it will be given, knock and the door will be opened to you, pro-active apologetics for the adventurist, as opposed to spoonfeeding apologetics…, how difficult can this question be, how do you knock on a door? so go, taste and see for yourself.)
 
Re the Opening Post, I have long been upset with dishonest and self-deceptive arguments in favor of God’s existence within my own Catholic faith. Everybody bows down to Aquinas’ “proofs” of God’s existence, but in the end they are patently invalid as “proofs.” If sheer “being” = a higher, logically prior “cause” so that there must be a God, then God’s sheer “being” = a higher, logically prior “cause” of God, Himself – i.e., a kind of “super-God.”

In other words, God’s Own “ultimateness” disproves the very argument claimed to be proof of God.

We can’t just say, “Oh, the argument doesn’t apply to God!!!” We have to have a proven reason why this would be true.

There is, however, a pretty good inductive argument for God’s existence. It’s based on the existence of prophetic typology in the Bible. Basically, it’s this: The Old Testament is jammed with symbolic structures called “typological word pictures” predicting Christ centuries before Christ came. Only a very real God could have arranged for that to occur. If someone is close-minded, the argument is easy enough to dismiss – “Oh, he has a wild imagination. He deceives himself into thinking that those prophetic things are there!” But, the person concluding that would be wrong, and the real problem isn’t wild imagination – it’s the close-mindedness of the one dismissing the claim.

Another inductive proof of God’s existence is something I call “the prayer experiment.” I’ll elaborate only if someone expresses an interest.

–Peter Dawson
 
anEvilAtheist said:
Thanks for the recommendation. I’ll look into it, but I can’t promise I’ll read it. I’ve seen some of C.S. Lewis’s work in the past and was very unimpressed (though I absolutely loved reading Narnia when I was a child). I think the central argument in Mere Christianity is fatally flawed because it does not address the possibility that Jesus may have been a legendary figure. I personally believe that he probably existed, but that the biblical account of his life is not completely accurate. Also, I listened to the audio version of The Problem of Pain. I was hoping to hear a decent refutation of the problem of evil, but instead he just showed that some evil is consistent with a benevolent God. I agree with him that some evil might be consistent with a loving God, but I think there are many especially problematic types of evil that he did not adequately address.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, but let me just make plain that “Surprised by Joy” is not a didactic or apologetic work. It does not set out to teach or prove a point. So don’t avoid it on that score.
 
Saint Augustine asked the questions, “If there is no God, why is there so much good? If there is a God, why is there so much evil?” The strongest argument against the existence of God is Augustine’s second question. I don’t think anyone has a completely satisfying answer to that question. We have a partial one. Ultimately, it’s going to come down to a leap of faith. I think we can explain why God permits evil easier than the atheist can explain why there is good.
 
Th0t said:
I listened to this talk today and it is rather interesting.

Arguments for God’s Existence ~ Peter Kreeft

peterkreeft.com/audio/08_arguments-for-god.htm

You can download it (mp3) by right clicking and clicking save file as or save link as.

“Supposed you are in a deserted island and you see the words SOS in the sand, are you going to believe that the sand made these markings?”

:blessyou:
Click to expand...
Thanks for the recommendation. I had actually listened to that talk a month or so ago.
Lampo said:
I recommend these too: Dr. Peter Kreeft
Click to expand...
I’ve read some of his articles on that site, including his 20 arguments for the existence of God. I have found flaws in those 20, and all of the arguments he uses in that talk. If there are one or two of his arguments in particular that you think are definitely valid, I would be happy to explain why I reject them so you can see if there is some flaw in my reasoning.
 
anEvilAtheist said:
Thanks for the recommendation. I had actually listened to that talk a month or so ago.

I’ve read some of his articles on that site, including his 20 arguments for the existence of God. I have found flaws in those 20, and all of the arguments he uses in that talk. If there are one or two of his arguments in particular that you think are definitely valid, I would be happy to explain why I reject them so you can see if there is some flaw in my reasoning.
Click to expand...
I couldn’t find his 20 arguments. Could you paste the link here? I found his six arguments; # Argument from Design

Argument from First Cause​

Argument from Conscience​

Argument from History​

Argument from Pascal’s Wager​

Argument from Desire​

 
Lampo said:
I couldn’t find his 20 arguments. Could you paste the link here? I found his six arguments; # Argument from Design

Argument from First Cause​

Argument from Conscience​

Argument from History​

Argument from Pascal’s Wager​

Argument from Desire​

Click to expand...
Twenty Arguments For The Existence Of God


  1. *] The Argument from Change
    *] The Argument from Efficient Causality
    *] The Argument from Time and Contingency
    *] The Argument from Degrees of Perfection
    *]The Design Argument
    *]The Kalam Argument
    *]The Argument from Contingency
    *]The Argument from the World as an Interacting Whole
    *]The Argument from Miracles
    *]The Argument from Consciousness
    *]The Argument from Truth
    *]The Argument from the Origin of the Idea of God
    *]The Ontological Argument
    *]The Moral Argument
    *]The Argument from Conscience
    *]The Argument from Desire
    *]The Argument from Aesthetic Experience
    *]The Argument from Religious Experience
    *]The Common Consent Argument
    *]Pascal’s Wager
 
 
anEvilAtheist said:
I’ve read some of his articles on that site, including his 20 arguments for the existence of God. I have found flaws in those 20, and all of the arguments he uses in that talk. If there are one or two of his arguments in particular that you think are definitely valid, I would be happy to explain why I reject them so you can see if there is some flaw in my reasoning.
Click to expand...
Apparently, Kreeft admits to exactly what you said right up front. There are flaws. He says this in his last paragraph before he goes into the 20 arguments.

“Not all the arguments are equally demonstrative. One (Pascal’s Wager) is not an argument for God at all, but an argument for faith in God as a “wager.” Another (the ontological argument) we regard as fundamentally flawed; yet we include it because it is very famous and influential, and may yet be saved by new formulations of it. Others (the argument from miracles, the argument from religious experience and the common consent argument) claim only strong probability, not demonstrative certainty. We have included them because they form a strong part of a cumulative case. We believe that only some of these arguments, taken individually and separately, demonstrate the existence of a being that has some of the properties only God can have (no argument proves all the divine attributes); but all twenty taken together, like twined rope, make a very strong case.”
 
anEvilAtheist said:
If there are one or two of his arguments in particular that you think are definitely valid, I would be happy to explain why I reject them so you can see if there is some flaw in my reasoning.
Click to expand...
Care to explain why you reject the first one? - Argument from Change?
 
anEvilAtheist said:
If there are one or two of his arguments in particular that you think are definitely valid, I would be happy to explain why I reject them so you can see if there is some flaw in my reasoning.
Click to expand...
If you want, how about #5 too? - The Design Argument.
 
wasmit said:
By that reasoning, humans have never created anything either, they only manipulate what already exists.
Click to expand...
I find your assumption to be rather presumptuous. Truly, if humans hadn’t really created anything than Karta wouldn’t have had to figure out how to short circuit the electric fence and she wouldn’t have had to worry about tranquilizer guns being held at the ready by zoo officials for the simple fact that man isn’t capable of creating anything.
 
Dear EvilAtheist. I have read before and re-read again the article on the site you sent. I found it interesting, but it didn’t ring true with my own experience of what I have read in ACIM. Many other concerned posters have also said their piece in regards to what they think is stated in ACIM. I personally have found most of what they claim the course claims as UNTRUE. All I can think is that they ‘just didn’t get it’. Just like so many devoted Christians think the Catholic church is the Whore of Babylon and others believe it to be the Anti Christ, all with supporting scripture and arguments to support and convince the uninformed, I believe ACIM has been successfully discredited. IF this IS the true voice of Jesus, then evil has had a field day and successfully boxed Him into the NEW AGE movement. I was given a site to view on the Rosary and St Faulstine. I also, read her diary with interest. Rather than conflict with what I have read in ACIM, it reinforced it. The visuals were different but the theme was the same. ( no-one really believes that there are REAL flames in hell. Hell’s flames symbolize, to finite imaginations, excruciating pain & suffering as a result of being separated forever form God). The site was to show me my errors and present a REAL visitation from the REAL Jesus. I looked at it with a right mind but another would have also called it a NEW AGE experience. The ‘medium’ even had her own ‘spirit guide’ appearing as an angel and ‘astro travelled’. SEE HOW A BIASED MIND SEES. I will continue to study ACIM with discernment. One thing though, the Holy Spirit has clearly urged me NOT to contact or join any support group regarding this course but to do it only with the existing support I receive from the understanding of my own Catholic Faith. This I intend to do. Angie.
 
EvilAtheist…I’m still interested in why you reject Kreeft’s arguments on those particular two that I pointed out. Thanks.
 
anEvilAtheist said:
Thanks for the recommendation. I’ll look into it, but I can’t promise I’ll read it. I’ve seen some of C.S. Lewis’s work in the past and was very unimpressed (though I absolutely loved reading Narnia when I was a child). I think the central argument in Mere Christianity is fatally flawed because it does not address the possibility that Jesus may have been a legendary figure. I personally believe that he probably existed, but that the biblical account of his life is not completely accurate. Also, I listened to the audio version of The Problem of Pain. I was hoping to hear a decent refutation of the problem of evil, but instead he just showed that some evil is consistent with a benevolent God. I agree with him that some evil might be consistent with a loving God, but I think there are many especially problematic types of evil that he did not adequately address.
Click to expand...
You have entered here with honesty and respectfulness toward those you raise your issues with and in this I respect you for that.
Your searching for answers however, through the wrong means in that you are looking for the Truth in God through the arguments of others.

No matter what you are presented with it is going to be called into question because you are not investigating the evidence as you go along. It is true that forums such as this can certainly help you get answers as you search for the Truth in God and His being but you have another avenue you should also be following. If you pursue that other avenue as well, you will better appreciate the information and assistance you receive here.
Let me recommend you look into the life of Saint Justin Martyr who did not easily accept any belief system whether religion or otherwise but was a very intelligent researcher. After reading a bit about him, if only the basic story that lead him to Christianity, follow his principles and start by seeking information on the prophecies of the Old Testament and how they predicted the life of Christ as the Son of God and His fulfillment of the Old Testament. With such prophacies as were given there is no question their is a higher being and it goes on from there.

You are one that needs to find some of the proof on your own as well as what you learn here but you will better learn instead of debate if you pursue the historic facts first.

“St. Justin Martyr was born around 120 AD in Palestine into a pagan Gentile family. He studied the wisdom of Plato, Aristotle, and other great Greek thinkers and became a professional philosopher. One day, while reading philosophy by the seashore, he was noticed by an old man who took the time to strike up a conversation about philosophy and religion. The elderly gentleman was a Christian and witnessed to Justin on how Jesus fulfilled all the prophecies in the Jewish holy books. As Justin investigated the matter, his realized that he had found the wisdom that he had been searching for all of his life.

Writings: Justin then became a Christian teacher and lived for a while in Ephesus, after which he moved to Rome, the Imperial Capital. He wrote and spoke openly about Christ, addressing two “apologies” or defenses of the Christian faith to the emperor himself. Justin Martyr became one of the most influential teachers of the 2nd century. Though contemporary writers tell us that he wrote extensively on many topics, only his two apologies and his Dialogue with Trypo, the Jew, survive today.”
Additional Information at;
http://www.crossroadsinitiative.com/library_author/23/St._Justin__Martyr.html

I am a 25 year professional investigator and researcher who dedicated the last 6 years to this quest and can tell you if you honestly seek the truth, God will give you the guidance and reassurance you need to come to Him.
 
Two Excerpts to ponder:
First Apology of St. Justin Martyr

ADDRESSED TO; To the Emperor Titus Ælius Adrianus Antoninus Pius Augustus Caesar, and to his son Verissimus the Philosopher, and to Lucius the Philosopher, the natural son of Caesar, and the adopted son of Pius, a lover of learning, and to the sacred Senate.

Chapter 31

“…In these books, then, of the prophets we found Jesus our Christ foretold as coming, born of a virgin, growing up to man’s estate, and healing every disease and every sickness, and raising the dead, and being hated, and unrecognised, and crucified, and dying, and rising again, and ascending into heaven, and being, and being called, the Son of God. We find it also predicted that certain persons should be sent by Him into every nation to publish these things, and that rather among the Gentiles [than among the Jews] men should believe on Him. And He was predicted before He appeared, first 5000 years before, and again 3000, then 2000, then 1000, and yet again 800; for in the succession of generations prophets after prophets arose.”

Chapter 32
“…Moses then, who was the first of the prophets, spoke in these very words: “The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until He come for whom it is reserved; and He shall be the desire of the nations, binding His foal to the vine, washing His robe in the blood of the grape.” It is yours to make accurate inquiry, and ascertain up to whose time the Jews had a lawgiver and king of their own. Up to the time of Jesus Christ, who taught us, and interpreted the prophecies which were not yet understood, [they had a lawgiver] as was foretold by the holy and divine Spirit of prophecy through Moses, “that a ruler would not fail the Jews until He should come for whom the kingdom was reserved” (for Judah was the forefather of the Jews, from whom also they have their name of Jews); and after He (i.e., Christ) appeared, you began to rule the Jews, and gained possession of all their territory. And the prophecy, “He shall be the expectation of the nations,” signified that there would be some of all nations who should look for Him to come again.”

Source;
crossroadsinitiative.com/library_article/269/First_Apology_of_St._Justin_Martyr.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top