I see it again and again. Apologists insist that religion is a good force in the world, encouraging morality and kindness. Apologists are upset about the “Militant Atheists” who don’t “respect” their worldview and dismiss all religion. Apologists insist that all people have sinned and that all people require the love of Christ to be saved from eternal damnation.
I get it. I get the arguments. I’ve heard them a million times.
Here is what Apologists don’t seem to get: WE ARE ASKING FOR EVIDENCE.
Don’t tell me about how much Christ loves me, give me evidence that Christ was God and rose from the dead. REAL EVIDENCE. Don’t tell me what the Bible says, give me evidence that proves the Bible is the word of God. Don’t tell me that the love of God makes us all kind, give me evidence, REAL EVIDENCE, that God exists at all.
May 5, 2009 at 8:52 pm |
Ok, let me explain this in the simplest terms possible: THERE IS NO EVIDENCE!
Such is the nature of faith, one believes based on feelings and ideals, not evidence, were it based in evidence it would not be faith.
You cannot prove the non-existence of God, you can give endless philosophic arguments, but there is no proof either way, which makes this argument as arid and pointless as it always has been.
May 5, 2009 at 11:05 pm |
Then the absence or presence of a god are identical. Parsimony then suggests the former, yet apologists continue in their attempts to validate their god to others with nothing more than philosophy sans verification. The burden of proof is on the claimant, not those who maintain the null hypothesis. Such bad application of philosophy is not evidence but sophistry. And apologists simply don’t get that.
May 6, 2009 at 12:36 am |
Regarding the idea that the non-existence of God cannot be proven and that there is “no proof either way”:
Proving the non-existence of God with complete certainty would indeed be impossible, but that doesn’t mean we can’t assess what evidence there is (or lack of evidence, in this case) and make a logical inference. If the God of the Bible is true, certain things that deity promises should conform with reality. For example, Christians who are born again and receive the Holy Spirit should, according to Christian theology, undergo a dramatic change because of their impregnation with the Holy Spirit. Why don’t we see that? Why does that only happy rarely? Why do Christians live unchanged lives (and don’t give me the bumpersticker line of “I’m not perfect, just forgiven”)? Likewise, if the Christian God is the only true God, then we should see prayers made to him answered with more frequency than prayers made to Allah or any other deity. Any of the testable claims made by the Christian God fail. That’s not proof that he doesn’t exist, but it is indeed evidence against it.
Regarding the nature of faith, which I’ve dealt with elsewhere, no religious person has yet to explain to me why faith is a good thing. Why should I have faith in the absence of evidence? Because God says so? How do I know God said that? The Bible? How do I know God wrote that? Completely blind faith in other areas of life is considered not a virtue but a marker of naivety and of a lack of critical thinking ability.
May 5, 2009 at 8:54 pm |
You know what apologist argument irritates me the most?
When they suggest that God can’t be empirically proven or reached with logic because he exists outside our realm. Essentially, they’ve put the argument in a place where no one can touch it. No amount of science, logic or evidence could get there, and this is supposed to be evidence itself? The lack thereof?
Oh, and let’s not pretend that religion is a universal force for good either, it is the cause of most wars and conflicts, and over history, has killed more people than anything.
Sorry, little rant on my part, but great post.
May 5, 2009 at 9:06 pm |
Which makes faith fundamentally worthless, since one person’s faith in something is just as equal as someone else’s faith.
For example, you may have faith god but someone else may have complete faith in Smurfs. Guess what? Both faiths are equally credible.
Now when faith, as shown, is worthless and people then get to try to have their faith based views imposed on everyone else … that’s when trouble starts.
May 5, 2009 at 9:09 pm |
Fundamentally worthless in your opinion. Can you claim an authority higher than your own opinion to back that assertion up?
May 5, 2009 at 9:40 pm |
All I need is the simplest logic.
If (and it is) the value of Faith in A = Value of Faith in B. The faiths are of equal worth no matter what A and B might be. Since they’re of equal worth but have no evidence in the least to back either up, they are inherently worthless.
You claim faith in the christian god, someone else may have faith in smurfs. Now, without using evidence which you have already declared goes right against the very idea of faith, explain why your faith is better than the one in smurfs.
May 5, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
You want to belief in Smurfs be my guest, what do I care. Faith in logic seems a little misplaced however, when one considers the way humanity has acted throughout its history. It could be argued that your belief in logic is as ephemeral as my belief in God, there is no evidence of my deity in everyday life, and precious little if any of yours.
May 5, 2009 at 10:59 pm
Sidney, I believe you have dodged the question:
‘explain why your faith is better than the one in smurfs.’
If logic can not be applied to either, how is one more valid than the other?
May 5, 2009 at 11:07 pm
You have got to be kidding me! Are you placing blind faith in the absence of evidence on the same footing as reason based on evidence?!? Nonsense on stilts!
May 5, 2009 at 11:59 pm
Logic, unlike things you have mere faith in, can be demonstrated to be true and valid. It happens every time you witness something that has cause and effect, every time you do even the simplest of maths, etc.
Because it has insurmountable evidence to support it, logic is validated. Unlike blind faith in any given thing.
And, as others have noted, you have attempted to dodge the question posed to you.
May 9, 2009 at 11:32 pm |
Faith in logic seems a little misplaced however, when one considers the way humanity has acted throughout its history.
A statement like this is, I suppose, to be expected from people who don’t use logic, haven’t ever studied it, and don’t know how to identify it, or how to identify logical fallacies. Logic isn’t that hard. People actually do use it everyday. But most can’t use it in a formal way. It’s kind of like most people can swing a fist, but they can’t actually fight in an effective way.
Please take a course in logic and/or critical thinking then take another look at logic/God/faith/etc when you have tools and training in place.
May 9, 2009 at 11:35 pm |
P.S.- Your statement is an example of a logical fallacy commonly called “false analogy”. In more colloquial speech it could be called “comparing apples and oranges”. It could also be called a “red herring”.
August 15, 2009 at 2:08 pm |
Not even fellow Christians care too much for such evidence, so I wouldn’t take it so hard on myself, were I in Your shoes…