The ultimate apologetic challenge

[Archbishop_10-K]

Hey guys.

This is currently the most extensive (at least the longest) challenge for the Christian faith I have yet seen. If anybody here has a lot of free time on their hands, you might want to take a crack at it. It’s called “Heirophant’s Proselytizer Questionnaire.”

geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/5599/hpq/

 

[John_Mortell]

:nope: So many stupid questions…

Why don’t animals go to heaven or hell when they die? What makes us so special?

Why do evil people often prosper? Justify your answer.

In light of the Trinity, angels, the Virgin Mary, etc., isn’t Christianity polytheistic? If the Trinity is three who are one, why the three names? Justify your answer.

Assume that I do not believe that Jesus died for my sins, or that if he did, that necessarily means I will go to your heaven. Name one thing that Jesus ever did for me.

Explain why getting dunked in or sprinkled with water will prevent me from being eternally tortured for the actions of the naked fruit-munching simpletons mentioned in #19.

Etc, etc. If this guy has any valid argument against Christianity it’s buried under way too many pointless questions to find.

Seriously, don’t waste your time with this.

 

[PhilVaz]

Yeah, mostly softball questions. Not that difficult, just long.

Actually, this one’s pretty good, just worded all wrong:

“If you are a Protestant or a member of an Eastern Orthodox church, explain why you are still using the Catholic Bible, which was formalized by a vote among (supposedly divinely inspired) cardinals and bishops in the fourth century CE, when you disagree with the idea that the Pope, who is higher in the Catholic hierarchy, is divinely inspired…”

“by a vote” – shades of Dan Brown Da Vinci Code

“divinely inspired” needs further clarification

Phil P

 

[Archbishop_10-K]

Agreed (that there are many stupid questions.) However, on the whole, I think it’s a good exercise for apologists.

 

[Scott_Waddell]

Obviously these questions were designed for rhetorical effect to chase off evangelists and quite frankly if creepy people in black pants and white, short-sleeved shirts with ties riding bicycles were coming to my door even I would be tempted to resort to a similar list. (From the Catholic perpective of course)

To his credit, he links to someone who responded and noted that it was a thoughtful and well-researched response.

One question in particular made me laugh. One that talks about the Church’s 2000 year persecution of the Wiccans. The fact that he doubts Christianity’s historical claims but implicitly swallows the idea of 2000 years of Wiccan history shows where he is coming from. Wicca can barely trace its origins past the 1950’s. Maybe (just maybe) you can show a connection to 19th-century Romantic-period occult rebirth. Check out: Goddess Unmasked: The Rise of Neopagan Feminist Spirituality by Philip G. Davis

Scott

 

[Socrates]

It’s not really so much an apologetics challenge as it is an obvious up front refusal to believe any answers that might come his way.

This questionaire is the online equivalent of clapping one’s hands over one’s hears and saying, “…na na na na na I can’t hear you na na na na…”

 

[Psalm89]

Some of the questions are so loaded that they reach the level of “Have you stopped beating your wife?”

The author is making a point through the questions, the answers will be ignored for the most part.

 

[Newvert]

Occasionally, when I start to read or hear atheistic style denounciations like this, I wait to see if there is anything substantive. Something I can try to get my mind around. Usually, and in this case, there isn’t.

As per the usual, the author appears overly, indeed embarrassingly, impressed with his own cleverness.

 

[The_Old_Road]

These aren’t “stupid” questions. The problem exists with the critics who obviously have not read or heard these questions explicated in a philosophically and/or theologically sophisticated way.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Many, if not most, of the questions, are good questions that an apologist is likely to encounter and needs to have an intellectually satisfying response for; for others, the response needs to be one of explaining why the question misrepresents a particular claim. I must say, though, that his claims about sex, while perhaps ringing true to popular Christian and “historically Catholic” perceptions of the act, show an overreaching desire to find condemnation in Scripture where none exists (such as his citation of a verse against fornication to support his claim that the Bible condemns sex - failing to note that fornication does not equal sex, and is in fact a term for immoral forms of sexual behavior). On the whole, while I wouldn’t make a point of answering all the questions in order to respond to him (pearls before swine), the list really is a good apologetic workout for somehow who is serious about having answers ready.