SR Blog

Some of these were covered in previous posts, but here are Lanny's notes from yesterday's broadcast.

Why Is This Important?

• God says we should be reasonable (cf., 1 Peter 3:15; Jude 3; Isaiah 1:18)
• Skeptics will not accept bad arguments
• To be good witnesses of Christ we need to use good arguments

What Makes An Argument Good?

• It is logically valid; The premises are true – “soundness”; It avoids obvious informal fallacies; It addresses the “real” issue(s)
• Do not counter a bad argument with another bad argument!

Example of a “Good” Argument

• Whatever begins to exist has a cause (principle of causality)
• The universe began to exist: (Scientific evidence [Geisler / Turek’s SURGE acronym] & Philosophical evidence [Kalam argument])
• Therefore, the universe has a cause
• Hence, due to the nature of the argument, this cause must be: timeless, spaceless, immaterial, infinite, powerful, and personal – the beginning of what we mean by “God”

Review of Previous Arguments covered:

Bad Argument: 1 You can’t disprove God unless you are omniscient

Bad Argument: 2  Everything that exists needs a cause

Bad Argument: 3 Evolution is not science

Bad Argument: 4 You can’t be moral unless you believe in God

Bad Argument 6: Very smart people have been theists, hence you should be too.

Bad Argument 7: People don’t willingly die for a lie, hence the apostles were telling the truth.

Bad Argument: 5

• Common Argument:
  • Hitler and Stalin were atheists… you don’t want to be like Hitler and Stalin do you? OR
  • Mother Theresa and Billy Graham are Christians… you want to be like Theresa and Graham don’t you?
• Problem(s):
  • Just because some atheists were/are wicked individuals does not mean all atheists are wicked individuals
  • It is debatable that Hitler was an atheist
  • Nor does it follow atheism is false because of their wicked actions
  • Many Christians were/are good does not mean all Christians are good individuals
  • Nor does it follow that Christianity is true because of their good actions
• Can The Argument Be Saved? Sort of…
  • What needs to be stressed is the foundations for good or wicked behavior
  • A Christian acting wickedly is counter to Christian teaching
  • An atheist acting wickedly is consonant with there being no moral law, right or wrong

Bad Argument: 9

• Common Argument:
  • A Christian’s testimony of a changed life is the most powerful apologetic there is (some may say the only apologetic needed) and you cannot argue with a changed life
  • Therefore, a Christian’s testimony is proof of God’s existence in general and Christianity in particular
• Problem(s):
  • The effect may be real, but what is the cause?
  • Skeptics may say belief creates a “placebo” effect
  • Christianity is not the only religion claimed to “change lives”
    • Many cults use personal testimony (i.e., Mormons)
    • Many atheists claim their lives changed drastically for the better after they stopped believing
• Can The Argument Be Saved? Somewhat…
  • Personal testimony will always be powerful for the individual, but not necessarily to others
  • Testimony needs to be supplemented with other factors in order to make sense of the experience
  • Otherwise, the “experience” may be merely attributable to some psychological factors

Bad Argument: 11

• Common Argument:
  • Like a soda can, a [Cavendish] banana is evidence of design in nature
• Problem(s):
  • The modern banana appears to be vastly different than earlier bananas due to hybridization / cultivation
  • Hence, the banana may be designed – but it is not obvious it is designed by nature since it was “engineered” by man
• Can The Argument Be Saved? No
  • Identifying “design” in nature is a highly controversial discipline
  • The most successful examples of design are found in the statistically improbable arenas of “cosmological fine tuning” and “biological information theory”
  • In contrast, the banana illustration – even if it is naturally in its current state – simply does not meet the requirements of being able to identify design
  • The banana could just “accidentally” have the characteristics it does

Bad Argument: 12

• Common Argument:
  • Laminin (a protein foundational for tissue development) is evidence that Christianity is true because the shape of the protein is in the shape of a cross.
  • Supposedly, this is “proof” that Christ “holds all things together” (cf. Col. 1:17).
• Problem(s):
  • The shape of a protein molecule is accidental as confirmation to the truth or falsity of any religion(s)
  • For example, if the laminin protein had been in the shape of a crescent would that be evidence for Islam?
  • The cross as a symbol for Christianity is not essential to Christianity – it was not even a symbol until many years after Christianity began [4th century A.D.].
  • Laminin is not in the shape of a cross – strictly speaking – rather it is “cross-ish.”
  • Some pictures of laminin even appear to be more “swastika-like”, does this imply Nazi-ism (or Hinduism) is the foundation of reality?
• Can The Argument Be Saved? No
  • This argument uses a cultural (conventional, man-made) symbol, imposes that on a biological entity, and then claims that biological entity is evidence for the truth of the religion on which the symbol is connected.
  • Christians would do much better sticking to the better developed arguments found in cosmological fine-tuning and biological information systems as evidence for design.

Bad Argument: 8

• Common Argument:
  • Pascal’s Wager: If Christianity is not true, and the person remains an unbeliever, then nothing happens at death. If Christianity is not true, and the person becomes a Christian, then they will live a good life with no regrets at death. If Christianity is true, and the person becomes a Christian, then they gain a good life and heaven at death. If Christianity is true, and person remains an unbeliever, then they will experience Hell at death. So whether Christianity is true or not, a person should still become a Christian
• Problem(s):
  • The wager only considers two options (Christianity and atheism), why not others? (i.e., Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.)
  • The wager may seem to “threaten” the unbeliever – “If you don’t believe x, then you will be punished”
• Can The Argument Be Saved? Yes
  • Pascal’s Wager can still be useful in certain circumstances were the choices have been reduced to just two
  • It may also be used in conjunction with other arguments to great success

Bad Argument: 10

• Common Argument:
  • “You just have to have faith…”
• Problem(s):
  • Implication is that something should be believed for completely arbitrary reasons (which is unreasonable)
  • Uses an incorrect definition and application of faith
• Can The Argument Be Saved? No
  • People rightly reject what they have no reason to believe
  • The chances of shooting a small target blindfolded is very difficult
  • Faith is putting your trust (belief) in someone or something that has evidence of faithfulness

How Can I Avoid Bad Arguments?

• Read good, well respected authors
• Get a reliable and accepted apologetics book and study it carefully
• Take a class in Logic and/or Critical Thinking
• Always be on the “lookout” for loopholes in any argument you encounter
• Be patient in dialogue and study with others (both skeptic and Christian)

Conclusion

• The truth of the Gospel does not depend on our ability to develop an argument
• Whether the Gospel is true or not is independent of our argumentation
• If Christianity is true, then any argument against it must have a fallacy somewhere
• God is Truth, no falsity can exist in His presence
• As such, Christians should not (and need not) rely on poor arguments to defend the faith
• There are many good arguments at the Christian’s disposal to defend the faith – Use them!