Every once in a while I stumble on some funny Christian apologetics. The most recent one was an online book titled the “Handbook of Personal Evangelism“. It has 23 chapters of delightful non-sequiturs and bad logic. Some of my favorite arguments:
Below are reasons we believe in God:
…
3. A person who doesn’t believe in God will have to face the problem of trying to substantiate a negative. This particular negative would be impossible to prove. Here is why.How can a person prove there is no God? Has this person been everywhere within and without the universe? If there is somewhere he has not been, God might be there. Does this person know everything? If there is something he does not know, that something might be God.
A reason to believe is that you can’t prove it’s not true? This one is always funny to me. No doubt, Dr. A Ray Stanford also believes in bigfoot, UFOs, the Loch Ness monster, and elves. Further, he believes they all live together … with the smurfs – afterall, no one can prove that it isn’t true.
Reasons for Believing the Bible
…
2. John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist denomination, said something like this: The Bible was written either by –(a) good men,
(b) bad men, or
(c) God.(a) If good men wrote the Bible and then claimed it was written by the inspiration of God, they would be liars, and liars are not good men. They would be deceivers, and good men don’t purposely deceive people.
(b) If bad men wrote the Bible, they would be condemning themselves because the Bible condemns sin. Bad men tend to justify themselves, but the Bible never justifies sin. Bad men couldn’t have written the Bible because the Bible is a good book.
(c) Since neither good men nor bad men wrote the Bible, the only person left is God. God wrote the Bible, and it is a MASTERPIECE OF HIS HANDIWORK!
Ah, it’s the old “there are only three possibilities, two are wrong, and therefore the last one must be right!” By this logic, every religion which preaches good is true. And that’s why I’m a Mormon… and a Muslim. And a Cathar, a buddhist, a Bahai, a Hindu, and Hare Krishna. Crap, there’s a lot of religions and cults that taught some good things.
Oh, here’s a bizarre one:
9. The Bible is scientifically accurate.
…
Jeremiah 10:12 – Einstein’s theory, E=MC^2
Wow. The book of Jeremiah has Einstein’s equation in it?
It is He who made the earth by His power, Who established the world by His wisdom; And by His understanding He has stretched out the heavens.
Jeremiah 10:12
You can’t get any clearer than that. Now I’m starting to think Einstein stole his famous equation from Jeremiah. In fact, I think I’m going to start referring to it as “Jerimiah’s equation of mass–energy equivalence”, and Wikipedia needs a bit of updating. To all you nonbelievers: “Checkmate!”
Wow. Just wow.
I don’t think there is a way to “prove” there is a God, I think that all religions are based on Faith.. Thats why faith and religion are often synonymous terms.
But I do think my Proofs of God’s existence are far more compelling than these. Take a look if you think you can debunk them!
http://whatsamormon.wordpress.com/2008/12/12/proof-that-god-exists/
Nice. I especially like this:
“Does this person know everything? If there is something he does not know, that something might be God.”
Sure, it might be. It might also be an ironclad proof that god doesn’t exist, and then where would you be?
If there were an omnipotent being, there’d be better evidence for its existence. We wouldn’t have to search around for it, intentionally over-interpret events, and generally make shit up. To me that’s the crux of the matter.
Tiny, (can I call you Tiny?)
… How embarrassing.. I’m not sure sure where your quoting from or what that particular quote even means so… sorry about that some of those “proofs” are better than others. But regardless of whatever I wrote, I really don’t believe there can be ironclad proof that God does or does not exist. For me that would be like saying -Because every swan I’ve seen has been white, every swan must be white.- It seems to me that the facts on if God exists or does not can not be attained (or at least haven’t been by you or I, because we’re living…).
I doubt that any atheist (or any theist for that matter) hopes to conclusively win the debate over the existence of God for all humanity. This is because the evidence is non-existent for some and all around us or others. Many people look at a beautiful waterfall, a newborn baby, a saved life or into the eyes of a loved one and see evidence for God’s existence very plainly. Many others however see nothing but injustice, trials, pain and over active imaginations.
This is why the subject of faith is plastered over all religions. The whole point is to believe what you cannot see physically and trust in the growth you experience. Let me illustrate a point:
The story is told that a wealthy father knew that if he were to bestow his wealth upon a child who had not yet developed the needed wisdom and stature, the inheritance would probably be wasted. The father said to his child:”
“All that I have I desire to give you—not only my wealth, but also my position and standing among men. That which I have I can easily give you, but that which I am you must obtain for yourself. You will qualify for your inheritance by learning what I have learned and by living as I have lived. I will give you the laws and principles by which I have acquired my wisdom and stature. Follow my example, mastering as I have mastered, and you will become as I am, and all that I have will be yours.”
I believe that if an “omnipotent being” is out there, then he has certainly chosen to take a back seat to our choices and learning here on earth (nothing seems to be just given to us here). For all I know that may be the best or only way to accomplish whatever growth he has planned for us.
This enigma of God bred uncertainty must be remedied by some form of guidance and so that may be why we have revealed word in every religion (another form of evidence for some). Whether you read the Koran, the Tamuld, or the Bible, they all ask you to search for more truth. It seems that all religions contain varying degrees of truth and suggest as the Bible says: search and ye shall find ask and it shall be given unto you. They all ask us to put forth a little effort to gain the reward we can see in the peace, purpose and moral compass that the knowledge of God has given to those around us.
hhmmn… that was a bit more rambly than I would have liked… hope it at least amused.
have a superduper day!
After having seen a documentary on German Jesus Freaks and another on evangelical missionaries during the world cup in Germany, I didnt expect be suprised again today… Well – I am!
Evangelicals really seem to be reading their Handbook, it explaines a lot of their wacky behaviour.
Hi griffithjones. Sorry for the delay – busy with Christmas and all. I agree that we can’t prove God doesn’t exist. However, there are lots of options here. I would state it this way: a person’s opinion on whether God exists can vary from 0 to 10. A “0” means you have absolute proof that God doesn’t exist. A “10” means you have absolute proof that God does exist. It’s true that neither have been proven, so everyone falls into the 1-9 range. An atheist is someone who puts God’s existence in (say) the 0-4 range. We don’t claim to have *proven* God’s non-existence, so it is wrong to act as if we all assign a “0” to God’s existence. The whole argument depends on “atheist” being defined as someone who has proven that God doesn’t exist. We really don’t need to prove God doesn’t exist in order to believe that God doesn’t exist. Also, even if we accepted God’s existence, it doesn’t mean that we accept that *your* God exists. For example, I seem to remember Bill Maher saying (years ago) that he’s not an atheist – he just thinks all the world’s religions are complete bunk. Einstein had a somewhat similar opinion: he believed God existed – but he didn’t believe God had any interest in human morality, didn’t grant an afterlife, and didn’t inspire any religions. From that perspective, God is aloof, unknown by mankind, and religion is just some man-made creation.
Regarding Mormonism, and the link you provided: If God exists, I think it’s rather unlikely that he inspired Mormonism. I’ve learned a great deal about Mormonism from an old co-worker of mine (who was a Mormon, and had gone on a mission). Mormonism has a number of problematic historical claims. They claimed that Native Americans were descended from Jews (or Middle-Eastern people). Genetic studies have proven that Native Americans are not closely related to people from the Middle-East. Rather, they are most closely related to people from Siberia (who obviously crossed the Bering Strait).
Mormonism claims that there was a giant war in North America. No one has been able to find any evidence of this – despite the fact that we should.
Even my Mormon friend openly acknowledged problems in Mormon historical claims.
The Bible has historical problems, as well. At the very least, the first ten chapters of Genesis are not historical. The earth isn’t 6,000 years old, and the flood never happened. I would expect that a divine author of the Bible could do a little better with historical facts. (I actually have a page about the Bible’s a-historical claims here: https://tinyfrog.wordpress.com/2007/09/05/creationism-versus-archaeology/ )
I’ll critique your link (“Proof that God Exists”) within the next day or two.
Sometimes, when I read things written by one person, and then read things written by another person, I can kinda tell… I’m not mentioning any names here or anything… I just wonder…
Okay, so I went to the “whatsamormon” site griffithjones mentioned and I must say I found it quite dizzying. In particular, Point #13.
“13. Ontological Argument (by Anselem)
1. It is greater for a thing to exist in mind and reality than in the mind alone.
2. The definition of God is that which a greater cannot be thought of.
3. Suppose God exists in mind but not in reality
4. Then a greater God could be thought of, a God of mind and reality.
5. This is impossible for God is “that than which a greater cannot be thought”.
6. Therefore, God exists in the mind and reality.
God is thought of, none can deny this.”
Wow. Truly dizzying intelect. I’ve read it half a dozen times and now feel like I’m about to fall over.
Here’s my critique of the first few reasons to believe in God/Mormonism:
1. Change
2. Efficient causality
Actually, I’m not clear on what the difference is between these two descriptions. They seem to be the same “prime mover” argument. There are a couple problems with the prime mover argument: (1) quantum physics does away with the need for every cause to have an effect. For example, the spontaneous decay of radioactive elements involves no cause. (2) Even if we assume the universe needs a cause, we don’t know that the cause is “God”. You assert that “God” is the cause, but that’s not actually known. Hundreds of years ago, people could make the same claim about thunder (“thunder needs a cause, no one knows the cause of thunder – God is the cause”). You don’t know that’s actually true, and this is a “God of the gaps” argument (i.e. we don’t know what the cause is, therefore, it’s God). (3) While you assert that the universe had a cause, and that cause is God, that leaves you with a new link in the cause-effect chain: who caused God?
3. Time and contingency – the possibility of any number of things happening at any time in our history causing our extinction throughout the passage of infinite time is certain.
I’m unclear on where this “infinite time” comes from. Also, human beings have not existed for an infinite amount of time, and therefore, could not be vulnerable to extinction for an infinite amount of time.
4. Degrees of perfection
I’m not quite clear on this argument. There are degrees and variations in things that exist, and because some variations are seen as better than others implies some sort of perfect being is in existence?
5. Design – Ponder the order of the Nature around you, its intricate order and beauty is the product of either chance or intelligent design…
First, you have to be aware of the creative power of evolutionary systems before you can claim that there is design or a designer. If you don’t understand evolution, then you will most definitely make the error of seeing design in undesigned things. Second, evolution is not “chance”. Third, there is also much evil in the world. Smallpox killed more people in the 20th century than all the wars of the 20th century. Within your framework of belief, God made smallpox and allowed it to exist. There’s also venomous snakes, spiders, tapeworms, mosquitoes, malaria, cholera, influenza, HIV, earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, etc. Apparently, these were also “designed”.
Further, if the universe and the earth are designed, then we should ask: why is the vast majority of the universe uninhabited and uninhabitable? We are living on a tiny little planet surrounded by uninhabitable space. It would be an understatement to say that 99.99999999% of the universe is uninhabitable. That doesn’t sound like design. It sounds like life on earth was chance – and most of the universe lost that cosmic lottery.
6. The kalam argument
I’m unsure how this differs substantially from the “prime mover” argument from items 1 and 2.
“Okay, so I went to the “whatsamormon” site griffithjones mentioned and I must say I found it quite dizzying. In particular, Point #13.
“13. Ontological Argument (by Anselem)
(…)
Wow. Truly dizzying intelect. I’ve read it half a dozen times and now feel like I’m about to fall over.”
As the original site is blocked to me from work (streaming media) I will present a rebuttal, that shows that Anselm is unreliable at best.
We have the original argument:
1. It is greater for a thing to exist in mind and reality than in the mind alone.
2. The definition of God is that which a greater cannot be thought of.
3. Suppose God exists in mind but not in reality
4. Then a greater God could be thought of, a God of mind and reality.
5. This is impossible for God is “that than which a greater cannot be thought”.
6. Therefore, God exists in the mind and reality.
God is thought of, none can deny this.
I begin with the assertion that (a) we live in a universe (Universe-A)with imperfections. We can debate this if contended, but I think it can be agreed upon by all parties.
(b) Suppose a material universe B, that exists in the imagination.
(c This universe is created by a God-creator B, also in the imagination.
(d) This universe lacks the imperfections of this world, while has all its benefits.
There are two points that can be inferred:
(a)(d)–> (e) Universe-B is a greater universe than Universe-A, which is impossible if (1) is true.
if the imaginary God-Creator-B made a greater creation than the God-Creator-A that exists in reality, than GC-B is greater than GC-A, which also contradicts (1)
Simply put, the most perfect creator imaginable would not have created the current imperfect world, therefore if an actual God exists, it cannot be Anselm’s God.
(I should note than I am retelling an argument from memory, from Dennett I believe. Any errors are probably due to my faulty recollection.)
Therefore Anselm’s argument seems to
Ignore the final line, “Therefore Anselm’s argument seems to” as a result of faulty editing.
I remember hearing about Anselm’s argument for the first time in my college philosophy class. I never really took it as a serious argument. It’s the kind of thing that maybe theists could buy into, but my perception of it was that Anselm’s argument is obviously flawed. But can you explain why it’s flawed? It always seemed more like an exercise in logic, and a chance to examine how clever someone is by their ability to refute it, rather than being a real argument that someone could buy into. (Although, I guess some theists don’t view it that way.)
I would be amused if this wasn’t so tragically sad.
First of all. Ray Stanford is a flawed individual. I know his son Lee. I know his daughter Patty. I know some of his other family members, and we all know his failures. Ray is a sinner, as is and was every single person who has lived throughout history, save Jesus Christ. Some of his weaker arguments would have been better kept to himself, however, the fact that he offered weak arguments doesn’t mean his strong points are without merit. So let me set the record straight.
God doesn’t have to prove anything to you or anyone else. He simply IS. (Heb. 11:6) He will prove Himself to an honest seeker, but He doesn’t spend His time casting His pearls before swine. (Matt. 7:6) He is the potter, and you are the clay. Clay doesn’t get to tell the potter how to mold the clay. (Romans 9:20)
“A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels: To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark (hidden) sayings. The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.” (Prov. 1:5-7)
Decide if you want to be a wise man or a fool.
“Seek the LORD while He may be found, Call upon Him while He is near. Let the wicked forsake his way, And the unrighteous man his thoughts; Let him return to the LORD, And He will have mercy on him; And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon.
“ For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways,” says the LORD. “ For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts.”” (Isa. 55:6-9)
God took on flesh to die for your sin as well as everyone else’s sin. He paid the penalty for your sin, and offers you the free gift of salvation. He offers it freely because He knows you cannot earn salvation for yourself. Either you acknowlege your sinful position before Almighty God, and ask His forgiveness, or you perish in your sin. The choice, allowed because God allows us free will, is yours.
“For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written:
“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
And bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.”
Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, that no flesh should glory in His presence. But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God—and righteousness and sanctification and redemption— that, as it is written, “He who glories, let him glory in the LORD.” (I Cor. 1:18-31)