10 Stupid Christian Arguments

ID-10015142

In this blog post I’ll be showcasing some of the dumbest Christian arguments I can find. Christians, if you don’t use these, good job.


Argument: (I just had to throw this one in) “What came first, the chicken or the egg” – this is widely accepted as a saying, and not a real question, but Creationists seem to think it is a major argument against evolution, some even having the attitude that it is impossible for evolutionists to answer.

Counter argument: The egg. Now, instead of explaining to the Creationist how evolution works, when they ask what laid the egg, we can respond by saying: ‘a jungle fowl.’ Chickens were selectively bred and domesticated from wild jungle fowl, and we have evidence of this. Just like the guinea pig was domesticated from the wild cavy, and the banana was domesticated I mean selectively bred from a wild variant that was almost inedible.


Argument: “You can’t prove Christianity false” – I haven’t personally seen many people use this one, but nevertheless it is one for Christians to avoid.

Counter argument: I don’t need to. You can’t prove a negative anyway. (Perhaps in some fields, like mathematics, but that is really besides the point.) You can’t prove Islam wrong. You can’t prove the Greeks wrong. Prove to me that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn’t exist. The fact that you can’t prove a negative like that gives no more credibility to your claim. Besides, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim, and the religious are the ones making the claim.


Argument: “There is historical evidence of Jesus, so therefor he must be telling the truth.”

Counter argument: There is no record of Jesus ever existing outside of the Bible. It’s bad enough that he didn’t write down a single word himself, but nobody else bothered writing about him until years after his supposed death. We have some forgeries, and a couple of mentions of somebody, but no real evidence. Furthermore, even if Jesus existed, it does not mean that he was really the son of God.


Argument “The consequences of atheism are depressing.” – this argument includes all of the claims that ‘atheists think that life is meaningless’ or ‘atheism causes war’ or really any of the other claims going around.

Counter argument: Even IF what you’re saying is true, and that is a big if, that does not make the idea that there is no god any less true. Christianity can bring, and has brought, all kinds of death and suffering. Look at the Spanish inquisition, the crusades, or just the hate and bigotry going around.


Argument: “I know that God exists” or “I hear God’s voice.”

Counter argument: An argument from personal incredulity is a fallacy. End of story. Just because you ‘think’ or claim to ‘know’ that God exists doesn’t mean he does. How do you know you’re not crazy? How do you know that an evil being from another religion is tricking you? You don’t.


Argument: “The Bible mentions names that archaeology has later found to be accurate. Therefor the rest of it must be true”

Counter argument: Harry Potter mentions London. London exists. Therefor Harry Potter must be true.


Argument: “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse” (Rom. 1:20)”

Counter argument: You want me to believe that God exists because a book told me too? The Bible is a claim, a claim without evidence, I might add. Don’t use the Bible to try and prove anything.


Argument: “The good in the world shows that God exists.”

Counter argument: Tsunamis, earthquakes, tornadoes, floods, volcanoes, smallpox, the plague, disease in general, poisonous animals, poisonous plants, poverty, death, etc. Was God on drugs when he made our planet or what?


Argument:  “So you think the Big Bang just happened? And evolution says we got here by chance, and life came from nonlife? That’s crazy—I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist!

Counter Argument: But you have enough to believe without a doubt that a supernatural invisible man poofed everything into existence and watches us like some sort of weirdo? On a more serious note, science has given us amazing claims that the earth goes around the sun, that disease is caused by microscopic creatures, and all sorts of other things, from quantum physics to plate movement. All of this is just as incredible as evolution, abiogenesis and the big bang, but it doesn’t get in the way of the bible, so it is accepted without a second thought. Your double-standard is illogical.


Argument: “If God made himself plainly known then we wouldn’t have free will”

Counter argument: Firstly, this means that God would rather let his creations burn in Hell. So much for being all-good. Secondly, Satan knows all about God, but still doesn’t follow him.

And there you have it, 10 stupid Christian arguments.

Image courtesy of Arvind Balaraman at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “10 Stupid Christian Arguments

  1. 1. {“What came first, the chicken or the egg” – this is widely accepted as a saying, and not a real question, but Creationists seem to think it is a major argument against evolution, some even having the attitude that it is impossible for evolutionists to answer.}
    Christians use this analogy as to point out that there the Evolution theory does not in any way provide the answer to the First Cause. Look up the Kalam Cosmological Argument. http://www.reasonablefaith.org/transcript-kalam-cosmological-argument

    2. {“There is historical evidence of Jesus, so therefor he must be telling the truth.”}
    There are in fact real evidences of Jesus outside the Bible. The vast majority of historians – even atheist historians – acknowledge Jesus as a historical figure. They also cannot find any reasonable alternative to the crucifixion of Christ, the empty tomb, the absence of his “real burial”, the witnesses of multiple people in different places at the same time of a physical Jesus after death, and many other factors, other than resurrection.

    3. {“I know that God exists” or “I hear God’s voice.”}
    The personal witness is actually one of the most real one.
    Look up Reformed Epistemology Apologetics. http://www.thinkchristianly.org/summary-of-alvin-plantingas-reformed-epistemology/

    4. {“So you think the Big Bang just happened? And evolution says we got here by chance, and life came from nonlife? That’s crazy—I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist!“}
    I am sorry to point out that this is quite the obvious strawman fallacy. I think that you are unaware of how science, philosphy, and other secularly acknowledged methods of finding truth is really advancing to point towards a Creator. Look up Alvin Plantinga, William Lane Craig, R.C.Sproul, etc.. Watch their debates against some of the most iconic atheists.

    5. “If God made himself plainly known then we wouldn’t have free will”
    Mankind are too limited to be able to choose the glory of God. It is so majestic and awe-inspiring that once it is revealed to its fullest extent, we are incapable of falling away from it. Satan is not human. He is a fallen angel.
    And no – God would not want us to burn in hell, but he would rather give us the choice to love Him – for that is the one reason we were created: to love Him and worship Him. How can a robot, with no free will, love? How can someone force love? Free will is necessary for a good God, and if that means not revealing Himself to the fullest extent, be it.

    Five out of ten “stupid questions” are actually very smart. Logical, experienced atheists out there shudder at these questions, if worded properly. Regarding the other five, I agree somewhat that they are silly, in how they are used these days. However, I do not find them worth countering. It is quite fascinating, even for the Christian, to find such correlation between logic and Christianity. There are too many evidences, though unpopular, to walk away from Christianity. I hope that you search with genuine and honest intentions. I apologize for my sloppy, somewhat simplistic counters. I’m yet to learn 🙂

    Like

    • 1. The cosmological argument has been debunked many times.
      Premise 1: Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
      Premise 2: The universe began to exist.
      Conclusion: Therefore, the universe has a cause.
      How do we know that whatever begins to exist has a cause? And how do we know that the universe began to exist? We don’t see anything popping into existence around us, but that doesn’t mean that it couldn’t happen. And as for the universe, the singularity caused it, and we don’t know if the singularity ever began to exist. The argument is based on some false premises.

      2. Where is the evidence of this? You claim these things, but I am unable to validate them. Plus, even if Jesus was a real figure, it does not mean that he did all of those things and really was the son of God. Stories get exaggerated.

      3. “The personal witness is actually one of the most real one.”
      Lots of people claim to see ghosts. 1/4 of the US population claim to have been abducted by aliens. Are they telling the truth? Or is it a hoax, a hallucination, or some other natural explanation?

      4. Science ‘proving’ God is a debate all on it’s own, and I have written some posts on that here on my blog. Anyway, as far as we have found, science does not point to God. If it did, 92-97% of the members of the national academy of science wouldn’t be atheists.

      5. So God chooses not to reveal himself and leave everyone guessing so that we can have free will? Even if he made himself clear, people would still have the choice not to love and worship him. Your counter to this point is the unproven claim that God’s ‘Glory’ is so great that humans are unable to not love him.
      This raises a question: Is God not able to make humans able to choose not to love him even with him revealing himself to his fullest extent? God could make people capable of refusing his ‘Glory’, but he doesn’t.

      Like

  2. The Cosmological has not been debunked; it has been countered.
    1 – “We don’t see anything popping into existence around us, but that doesn’t mean that it couldn’t happen.”
    I agree that just because we do not witness something, it does not necessarily make it non-existent. However, in this case, the assertion is that something can come from nothing. Scientists have tried to validate this statement using quantum physics, speculating fluctuations that arbitrarily bring the universe in and out of existence. However, even quantum fluctuations begin with energy so-called “virtual particles”. The assertion that something came from nothing not only contradicts the First Law of Thermodynamics (one of very few laws we are absolutely sure of), it contradicts the Scientific Method, which demands observation. Thus rejecting this premise is unscientific. And what is “nothing”? If there was no cause, the universe was the result of “nothing”, a universal negation. It is logically impossible.
    2 – The universe began to exist. Otherwise, there must have been an infinite past, which cosmology and philosophy assuredly rejected. The infinite past does not logically make sense. How do we still have energy, if energy has been decreasing for an infinite time? How is the universe still orderly, if entropy has been increasing for an infinite time? Also, supporting this claim results in rejecting the widespread theory of Big Bang.
    Thus the universe must have a cause that is timeless, spaceless, immaterial, uncaused, powerful, and personal. We call this cause “God”.

    2. Jesus is a historical figure. No historian doubts this. It is indubitable that Jesus was a great teacher who attracted the thousands, that he was crucified, and that he died. It is debated whether he was resurrected. If this is true, the whole of Christianity can be built from there, even without the supposed divinity or inerrancy of the Bible. Now, of the things historians are sure of are the death of Christ, the burial of Christ, the empty tomb, the many independent witnesses of his appearance after death, and the origin of Christian faith (that the disciples unquestionably believed in the resurrection of Christ, made obvious through their sacrifice and martyrdom). Given that these are true facts, the best logical explanation is the resurrection of Christ. Other hypotheses may be listed, but they will be countered and be found less likely than the resurrection, given that resurrection is a reasonable explanation (it is, if God exists). If Jesus rose from the dead, he fulfilled all the Jewish prophecies (which are in this case viewed as mere historical documents), which pointed to the fulfiller as Son of God. Also, Jesus had claimed to be Son of God, validating these claims through His resurrection.

    3. Let me rephrase: the personal experience is very real. Yes, people may claim that they were abducted by aliens – but did they experience it? An individual can rightfully trust his or her experience. If not, a belief in reality would be irrational. Yes, some experiences may be flawed or only in the mind, but the rest? You may go on believing that all Christians who claim to experience God are either lying or delusional, because as an outsider (I am supposing that you are..?) you cannot find the personal experience evidential. However, it should not be discarded as a logical fallacy. Otherwise, all things everyone claim to be true should be laboriously tested. Why does the court bother calling for witnesses at all?

    4. The unbelief of scientists does not defend the claim that science does not point to God. The assertion is based on the claim that all scientists are honestly seeking truth in their scientific researches.The reason why I as a Christian will not lose faith in the existence of God is that my faith is not based on science or logical arguments alone. They most definitely contribute, but, as I have mentioned before, the personal experience is rightfully reasonable to trust. Reason and science is a way, in my opinion, that we Christians can reach the honest, rationally minded atheists.

    5. As sinners, humans are filthy and horrifyingly unworthy in the face of the holy God. When they are met with this holiness and glory, they will fear the judgement, the ineffable contrast, and the unimaginable shame… This fear inevitably pushes mankind away from God. I think (this is not held by all Christians) God reveals Himself gradually to those who search Him so that they may go through the process of redemption and draw closer to Him instead of being pulled away the moment they are shone their sins. To those who do not search Him, they are still without excuse. God has revealed Himself through the human conscience, nature, and the concept of eternity/afterlife. So no. God does not leave everyone guessing.

    I apologize for being too wordy, I was compelled to explain with detail…
    and also for the delayed response.

    Like

    • Still, it is an important counter, which presents many factors not taken into account by the argument itself.
      1. The origin of the universe is very hard to study, as we have to do a lot of detective work. Just like physics and reality gets weird when you deal with atoms and quantum mechanics, perhaps the conditions at the origin of the universe were different too. We have no way of knowing.
      The singularity could have existed not eternally, but indefinitely. As far as we know, space and time didn’t exist outside of the singularity, so it could have existed for an infinite of time, because no time was passing.
      And finally, if Christians are happy to believe in an un-caused God, I am happy to believe in an un-caused universe.

      2.Of course, Jesus was a person…he was crucified…his tomb was empty…so he must have come back to life and gone to Heaven! Jumping to conclusions a bit, don’t you think? He could have been taken out of the tomb and thrown into a shallow grave. His followers could have destroyed the body and pretended he had risen. Someone could have pretended to be Jesus coming back to life. There are a lot of other possibilities. Even if he existed, there are other explanations.

      3. Mass hysteria, low frequency sounds, hallucinations. All of these things can cause people so see, feel, hear and experience entities or other phenomenon, but none of it is real. Universally, all humans experience the same things, and this is our basis to build our perception of reality. We can all agree on certain fundamental facts, but personal experience from a handful of individuals is unreliable. People have claimed to have been abducted, seen ghosts, seen bigfoot, and seen all sorts of gods. There is no way of verifying their claim.

      4.If science clearly pointed to a divine creator, how come the people that don’t notice that are the ones studying it? All of our theories so far do not involve God, so therefor, science does not accept it.

      5. That is another thing I dislike about Christianity. It teaches people that they are worthless, unworthy, wretched beings that deserve to burn for eternity. I’m not that big a fan of humans myself, but even that is overdoing things a bit! There is enough low self esteem and depression in the world, and religion isn’t helping!
      But anyway, that’s beside the point.
      The problem with God’s method is that the human conscience, nature, and the concept of eternity/afterlife can be explained perfectly well without him being in it. Not to mention, those EXACT same things could be used to explain any other god! God knows what evidence atheists need, and he is able to provide it, and an all-loving God would.

      Like

  3. 1. Then why did Time start, and how?
    Anything that exists must have an explanation, either by its own necessity, or by an external cause. The universe does not necessarily have to exist, therefore it must have an external cause. Thus it is necessary that there be an external cause, and that external cause is God. The existence of God is necessary by His own nature, but the universe does not. I know these are strong statements that are undeveloped in this comment, but ask your questions, then I will develop.

    2. He was thrown into a shallow grave – but Romans who very much wished to find it could not find it, no records, no evidence, no other tradition as such, no plausible explanation. So, according to you, someone pretended to be Jesus and met face to face with the people who lived and walked with Jesus for three long years and was not revealed as a fraud. And people, by nature of their fleshly instinct – which compels them to survive – went through tortures, persecution, shame, and finally died in the most horrid way known to the age, because they simply wished to pretend that this teacher who died was actually alive. Why, if there is no God, and humans are just animals, would this occur?

    3. So, a handful as in those of the world’s biggest religious group, dispersed around the globe, all somehow were handpicked by a frequency, or a hormonal mutation, hallucinations, etcetera that they became delusional and believed to have experienced precisely the same things. I’m not a scientist, but I know this is not science, nor logic.

    4. “All of our theories so far do not involve God, so therefor, science does not accept it.”
    Until the Big Bang theory, the First Cause, Evolution, Quantum Mechanics, Thermodynamics, etc… If science wants to stand on its own ground, it needs to have one. So far the ground it stands on is “nothing”, which defies science’s own principles (as I asserted in point 1). Masses of scientists when confronted with these questions end up either completely rejecting philosophy (which, by doing so, they are philosophizing), or completely rejecting all science’s laws.

    5. Religion is not supposed to ameliorate reality and deceive people by saying that they are good, or worthy, when they really are not. The unworthiness of humanity is the first half of the Gospel – that we as wretched beings NEED salvation, and that this salvation is freely given to us.
    “..can be explained perfectly well without him being in it.”
    No, they cannot be explained perfectly well without God. Why is there objective morality? Why is nature so defiant of probability and so mathematically correlating? How does eternity make sense? What is an afterlife and why does that exist? These questions simply cannot be dismissed.
    “…those EXACT same things could be used to explain any other god!”
    Okay, so you’re willing to argue after granting that there IS a god? Because if there is a god, the Christian God is the most plausible, philosophically and logically sensible God among any other supposed gods. But that’s a whole new debate.
    “God knows what evidence atheists need, and he is able to provide it, and an all-loving God would.” – Yes! I agree with you. And the thing is, He HAS provided the evidences to you. Look beyond your atheism, and look at the world, at logic, at facts as a mere human being. Open your mind, for a few seconds, to the possibility of God’s existence, the possibility of anything, and begin from there. If you would like me to do the same, well here I am. I am willing to be challenged, to be shaken, to be questioned, because I know that truth is truth. I’ve began from scratch several times, from the basis of no belief, and worked my way up to where I am. I genuinely hope you do the same.

    Like

    • 1. We don’t know. The problem with debating the origin of the universe is that there are far too many unknowns. We don’t know how time started. We don’t know IF time started. We don’t know if the universe does not ‘need’ to exist. The universe could have created itself.
      Furthermore, I can use your exact argument to claim that any other deity or being created the universe.

      2. Speaking of the Romans, funny how they kept records of who they crucified, and Jesus isn’t on any of them. It’s also funny how even though there were supposed to be people in the area keeping track of cults, Jesus was never mentioned. And how Jesus never wrote down a single word himself, isn’t it?
      Also, I never said that there *was* an imposter, only that there *could* have been one.
      It is perfectly reasonable for people to go through all sorts of things in the name of belief. They were convinced, perhaps tricked, that Jesus was divine, so they would go through all sorts of things to defend or keep that belief. Just like how terrorists blow themselves up because they believe they will be rewarded by Allah. Religion is a powerful weapon, especially when used to indoctrinate or delude people.

      3. Mass hysteria is only a part of it.There are many causes, and because these people already believe in God, it would make sense that they see him.
      I am guessing that you doubt certain claims, perhaps it is that aliens have abducted people, or that people have seen bigfoot and other Cryptids, or that people have seen Allah or other Gods. What are your explanations? Are the Muslims who say they have seen Allah lying? Are they delusional? Hallucinating? Whatever your answer, it can be turned around and used against Christianity.

      4. In earlier times humans knew much less, and used God to explain things. But as we learnt more about the universe and the world around us we learnt that we don’t need divine beings to explain it.
      Science stands on the ground of finding a natural explanation to the world and universe. Theories are subject to change and revision, and new evidence is welcomed, not rejected like religion would.

      5. Whether objective morality exists or not is debatable, and an entirely different discussion all together. As for nature, as far as I know, there are different ideas surrounding it. Perhaps the universe functions the way it does because it cannot function any other way. Perhaps these laws cannot be any different. Perhaps the laws of reality created themselves. It is still an interesting question, and does not necessarily need a divine being.
      An eternity, as with anything including infinity, is an almost incomprehensible thought. But, as time goes on without changing, it could continue to go on forever.
      And for an afterlife – we have no idea if one even exists.
      “The Christian God is the most plausible, philosophically and logically sensible god among any other supposed gods.” That is debatable as well. I could bring up the problem of evil, and the other issues and arguments revolving around ‘perfect’ and ‘OOO’ Gods. but, as you said, that is a whole new debate. All of the man-made gods have their flaws.
      I, as other atheists, am always open to the possibility of divine beings, however there is nothing major, nothing that immediately points to a god that cannot be explained in any other way.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s