Atheist fallacies

[Pim Pendergast]

A fallacy is an error in reasoning or logic. Atheists frequently employ them to support or defend their position. Here are some common ones.

Genetic fallacy. This has nothing to do with genes. It is referring to genesis, or origins. It is the attempt to discredit a belief on the grounds that its origins are dubious. For example, an atheist might claim that religion developed as a means of explaining the world or as an evolutionary adaptation or for psychological or social advantages. But you can’t discredit a belief by discrediting its supposed origins. Besides, we know that belief in the God of the Bible was the original religion and atheism arose out of man’s desire to deny the truth of God’s existence (Rom 1:18). Therefore atheism can be flatly rejected.

Ad hominem. This involves personally attacking your opponent instead of bringing a reasoned argument against him. For example, an atheist might say, “Only gullible/ weak/ uneducated people believe in God.” Just remember that those who reject God are “filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful” (Rom 1:29-31).

Begging the question. Also known as circular reasoning. This is when a claim is assumed to be true without any evidence to support it other than the claim itself. For example, atheists presuppose that God doesn’t exist and then claim that all evidence supporting the existence of God must be flawed because He doesn’t exist. We, on the other hand, know that God exists because the Bible tells us so, and we know that the Bible is reliable because it tells us it is inspired by God.

If I were God, I would/ wouldn’t… I wasn’t sure what to call this one, so I made up a name for it. Perhaps someone else on this godly forum knows the proper name. This is when people try to disprove God’s existence by claiming that if they God they would do things differently. For example, Richard Dawkins claimed that if God were real, He would have created fewer species. People often say something like, “If I were God, I wouldn’t allow suffering in the world; therefore God doesn’t exist.” Just because you might do things differently if you were God doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist. Personally, I wouldn’t do anything differently if I were God. He is perfect.

Can anyone else think of other fallacies?

[WalkingInTheLight]

Re: Atheist fallacies

Excellent post!

The last trend irritates me to no end. I get so sick of hearing, "If I was God I wouldn't want people to be afraid of me", or, "If I was God I wouldn't have bothered giving people free will". Really, why on Earth would I CARE what a godless atheist would do in God's shoes?!

[BelieverInGod]

Re: Atheist fallacies

Excellent post!

The last trend irritates me to no end. I get so sick of hearing, "If I was God I wouldn't want people to be afraid of me", or, "If I was God I wouldn't have bothered giving people free will". Really, why on Earth would I CARE what a godless atheist would do in God's shoes?!

AMEN!

And they don't seem to understand the fact that THEY'RE NOT GOD! I know their mommies all told them they're very special all their life, but seriously, their not that "special"

Anyway, I think 'mommy' usually meant 'special' as in, you go to a 'special' school because you need a 'special' education.

[Shimei]

Re: Atheist fallacies

A fallacy is an error in reasoning or logic. Atheists frequently employ them to support or defend their position. Here are some common ones.

Genetic fallacy. This has nothing to do with genes. It is referring to genesis, or origins. It is the attempt to discredit a belief on the grounds that its origins are dubious. For example, an atheist might claim that religion developed as a means of explaining the world or as an evolutionary adaptation or for psychological or social advantages. But you can’t discredit a belief by discrediting its supposed origins. Besides, we know that belief in the God of the Bible was the original religion and atheism arose out of man’s desire to deny the truth of God’s existence (Rom 1:18). Therefore atheism can be flatly rejected.

Ad hominem. This involves personally attacking your opponent instead of bringing a reasoned argument against him. For example, an atheist might say, “Only gullible/ weak/ uneducated people believe in God.” Just remember that those who reject God are “filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful” (Rom 1:29-31).

Begging the question. Also known as circular reasoning. This is when a claim is assumed to be true without any evidence to support it other than the claim itself. For example, atheists presuppose that God doesn’t exist and then claim that all evidence supporting the existence of God must be flawed because He doesn’t exist. We, on the other hand, know that God exists because the Bible tells us so, and we know that the Bible is reliable because it tells us it is inspired by God.

If I were God, I would/ wouldn’t… I wasn’t sure what to call this one, so I made up a name for it. Perhaps someone else on this godly forum knows the proper name. This is when people try to disprove God’s existence by claiming that if they God they would do things differently. For example, Richard Dawkins claimed that if God were real, He would have created fewer species. People often say something like, “If I were God, I wouldn’t allow suffering in the world; therefore God doesn’t exist.” Just because you might do things differently if you were God doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist. Personally, I wouldn’t do anything differently if I were God. He is perfect.

Can anyone else think of other fallacies?

Great post. I consider the "If I were God, I would/ wouldn't argument as God is no smarter than I am argument. It is pretty neat to see you outlining the common approaches that others have in arguing against Christianity. But what I come across most often are two reasons why they are arguing to begin with.

1) Christian representation. They are arguing and criticizing people based on their behavior and belief. However, the people that I have responded to in this type of criticism seemingly fall short when pointing out why criticize Christians when people are going against Christianity? Why would anyone oppose Jesus' teaching then criticize others for not following His teaching? People or rather atheist love to try to shift the current world problems on religion. They try to pass the current day wars on religious difference. But really, people are not killing because they differ in whether Moses wrote the ten commandments or not. They are acting outside religious teaching, at least, on the side of Christianity.

2) The God of the Old Testament - Oh, so many people here or there hate the God of the OT. He was a baby killer, a genocidal maniac and so on. They want to put the problem of evil or sin upon the shoulders of its creator. This, really, falls under your classification of "If I were God I would or wouldn't"... they seemingly fail to understand the difference between Justice and cruelty.

Enjoyable read Pim Pendergast.

[Billy Bob Jenkins]

Re: Atheist fallacies

Great post. I consider the "If I were God, I would/ wouldn't argument as God is no smarter than I am argument. It is pretty neat to see you outlining the common approaches that others have in arguing against Christianity. But what I come across most often are two reasons why they are arguing to begin with.

1) Christian representation. They are arguing and criticizing people based on their behavior and belief. However, the people that I have responded to in this type of criticism seemingly fall short when pointing out why criticize Christians when people are going against Christianity? Why would anyone oppose Jesus' teaching then criticize others for not following His teaching? People or rather atheist love to try to shift the current world problems on religion. They try to pass the current day wars on religious difference. But really, people are not killing because they differ in whether Moses wrote the ten commandments or not. They are acting outside religious teaching, at least, on the side of Christianity.

2) The God of the Old Testament - Oh, so many people here or there hate the God of the OT. He was a baby killer, a genocidal maniac and so on. They want to put the problem of evil or sin upon the shoulders of its creator. This, really, falls under your classification of "If I were God I would or wouldn't"... they seemingly fail to understand the difference between Justice and cruelty.

Enjoyable read Pim Pendergast.

How are your studies coming along, friend?

Christ's teachings are so consistent, specific, and unambiguous, it is impossible for there to be any disagreement as to what He meant. That is why there is only one True Christian™ sect. So how could an atheist disagree with two different interpretations of the Gospel? That would be bizarre!

Since no religious text promotes violence (except for the Bible, the Tanakh, the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita, the Holy Books of Thelema, and others) the phrase "Holy War" is practically an oxymormon. When did the Barton Cylinder, for example, ever condone violence? Never that I am aware of.

You are also right to point out, friend, that genocide and baby killing are "Justice" when God does it, whereas cruelty is something entirely different.

You are progressing nicely towards salvation, Shimei.

[Pastor Isaac Peters]

Re: Atheist fallacies

No true Scotsman. This fallacy involves making an assertion and then hand-waving away counter-examples by making the additional assertion that the counter-examples somehow aren't really counter-examples. For example, when confronted with the atrocities of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, atheists assert that those dictators weren't true atheists and that true atheists would have done things differently. That line of thinking is completely different from our Christian knowledge that since genuinely saved people do not sin (1 John 3:6, 5:18), anyone who commits a sin is not a genuinely saved Christian.

Fallacy of invincible ignorance, or, as it is often called on the Internet, "La la la, I can't hear you." This fallacy consists of sticking to an assertion after it has been proved wrong. Atheists commit this fallacy by clinging to the dogma of evil-utionism after we have shown them how wrong it is. By contrast, we Christians know that since we are to trust in the Lord with all our hearts (Proverbs 3:5-6) and to beware lest any man spoil us through philosophy and vain deceit (Colossians 2:8), unbelievers quite simply have nothing useful to tell us.

Appeal to consequences of a belief. According to this fallacy, a proposition must be true because of the adverse consequences if people didn't accept it. When atheists argue that adoption of atheist dogma will speed the progress of science, they commit this fallacy, since even if their assertion were true, it would not disprove the existence of God. On the other hand, we Christians understand the basic reality of human nature that without faith in Christ and adherence to the Holy Bible, people would have no moral compass, and society as we know it would be impossible.

[Shimei]

Re: Atheist fallacies

How are your studies coming along, friend?

Christ's teachings are so consistent, specific, and unambiguous, it is impossible for there to be any disagreement as to what He meant. That is why there is only one True Christian™ sect. So how could an atheist disagree with two different interpretations of the Gospel? That would be bizarre!

Since no religious text promotes violence (except for the Bible, the Tanakh, the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita, the Holy Books of Thelema, and others) the phrase "Holy War" is practically an oxymormon. When did the Barton Cylinder, for example, ever condone violence? Never that I am aware of.

You are also right to point out, friend, that genocide and baby killing are "Justice" when God does it, whereas cruelty is something entirely different.

You are progressing nicely towards salvation, Shimei.

My studies are going at slow but steady pace. I thank you for asking, but moreso, I am quite excited about what is happening or going to happen soon. I am going to be Baptized in two weeks!

Blind faith fallacy I love the argument about the laws of nature. How all things work according to certain laws, for example the speed of light. We know here on Earth that light travels a certain distance at a certain speed, but then a giant leap of "Faith" or assumption is stated by saying that light travels at the same rate across the unforeseen universe. And lets not even get into the reason why all things act according to laws, but yet it is ignorance by faith to say that a supreme lawgiver made all things...

Appeal to consequences of a belief. According to this fallacy, a proposition must be true because of the adverse consequences if people didn't accept it. When atheists argue that adoption of atheist dogma will speed the progress of science, they commit this fallacy, since even if their assertion were true, it would not disprove the existence of God. On the other hand, we Christians understand the basic reality of human nature that without faith in Christ and adherence to the Holy Bible, people would have no moral compass, and society as we know it would be impossible.

This is a great one Pastor. Yet countries such as Russia and other African settlements are increasingly becoming more religious as they advance. They are advanced and technologically so, and Evangelism is flourishing in these countries. And we only need to look upon the past at the greats, like Bacon, Kepler and Newton and so on... They hadn't an issue with Faith in God and Science.

[BelieverInGod]

Re: Atheist fallacies

No true Scotsman. This fallacy involves making an assertion and then hand-waving away counter-examples by making the additional assertion that the counter-examples somehow aren't really counter-examples. For example, when confronted with the atrocities of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, atheists assert that those dictators weren't true atheists and that true atheists would have done things differently. That line of thinking is completely different from our Christian knowledge that since genuinely saved people do not sin (1 John 3:6, 5:18), anyone who commits a sin is not a genuinely saved Christian.

Oh how many times I've heard this one. It's not like a True Christian(tm) where you have the Bible to follow, and if you don't follow it 100% then you're a cherry picker. With atheism, its simple, you don't believe in God, you're an atheist. No further proof of true atheism.

Appeal to consequences of a belief.

According to this fallacy, a proposition must be true because of the adverse consequences if people didn't accept it. When atheists argue that adoption of atheist dogma will speed the progress of science, they commit this fallacy, since even if their assertion were true, it would not disprove the existence of God. On the other hand, we Christians understand the basic reality of human nature that without faith in Christ and adherence to the Holy Bible, people would have no moral compass, and society as we know it would be impossible.

Have you seen that silly chart where they blame the "dark ages" on Christianity? The atheists will prattle on and on about how the "dark ages" were caused by the 'christians'. Well there's a lot wrong with that issue.

1. The 'dark ages' are called the 'dark ages' because there's no records.
2. The so called Christians is really the catholic church
3. I hate to say it, but the catholics brought Europe out of the dark ages
4. There is no proof that science would have moved forward at the rate they state.

[Billy Bob Jenkins]

Re: Atheist fallacies

My studies are going at slow but steady pace. I thank you for asking, but moreso, I am quite excited about what is happening or going to happen soon. I am going to be Baptized in two weeks!

Let us all pray that God does not kill you before then.

Blind faith fallacy I love the argument about the laws of nature. How all things work according to certain laws, for example the speed of light. We know here on Earth that light travels a certain distance at a certain speed, but then a giant leap of "Faith" or assumption is stated by saying that light travels at the same rate across the unforeseen universe. And lets not even get into the reason why all things act according to laws, but yet it is ignorance by faith to say that a supreme lawgiver made all things...

There is certainly nothing that violates the Laws of Nature, which God authored anonymously. The only divine laws that get broken are the ones acknowledged in the Holy Bible.

This is a great one Pastor. Yet countries such as Russia and other African settlements are increasingly becoming more religious as they advance. They are advanced and technologically so, and Evangelism is flourishing in these countries. And we only need to look upon the past at the greats, like Bacon, Kepler and Newton and so on... They hadn't an issue with Faith in God and Science.

And look at the civility that always accompanies Christianization! For example, the institutional extermination of queers in Uganda. The enlightened minds of Christian Evangelicals are to thank for that, especially white American ones.

[James Hutchins]

Re: Atheist fallacies

I have always thought the:
God Loves Everyone Fallacy was perhaps one of the stupidest I have heard. The only people who want to believe this are wicked, unworthy, shallow deviants. They are hoping that they can continue to do whatever they want and will never have to 'pay the piper'. You'd think, these God hating atheists would at least read the rule book to see what they up against BEFORE putting blind trust into things.

Leviticus 20:23 And ye shall not walk in the manners of the nation, which I cast out before you: for they committed all these things, and therefore I abhorred them.

Leviticus 26:30 And I will destroy your high places, and cut down your images, and cast your carcases upon the carcases of your idols, and my soul shall abhor you.

Deuteronomy 32:19 And when the LORD saw it, he abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters.

Psalm 5:5 The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.

Psalm 5:6 Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing: the LORD will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.

Psalm 10:3 For the wicked boasteth of his heart's desire, and blesseth the covetous, whom the LORD abhorreth.

Psalm 11:5 The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.

Psalm 53:5 There were they in great fear, where no fear was: for God hath scattered the bones of him that encampeth against thee: thou hast put them to shame, because God hath despised them.

Psalm 73:20 As a dream when one awaketh; so, O Lord, when thou awakest, thou shalt despise their image.

Psalm 78:59 When God heard this, he was wroth, and greatly abhorred Israel:

Psalm 106:40 Therefore was the wrath of the LORD kindled against his people, insomuch that he abhorred his own inheritance.

Proverbs 6:16-19 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

Proverbs 22:14 The mouth of strange women is a deep pit: he that is abhorred of the LORD shall fall therein.

Lamentations 2:6 And he hath violently taken away his tabernacle, as if it were of a garden: he hath destroyed his places of the assembly: the LORD hath caused the solemn feasts and sabbaths to be forgotten in Zion, and hath despised in the indignation of his anger the king and the priest.

Hosea 9:15 All their wickedness is in Gilgal: for there I hated them: for the wickedness of their doings I will drive them out of mine house, I will love them no more: all their princes are revolters.

Amos 5:21 I hate, I despise your feast days, and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies.

Zechariah 11:8 Three shepherds also I cut off in one month; and my soul lothed them, and their soul also abhorred me.

Malachi 1:3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.

Romans 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

Revelation 2:6; 15 But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate.
I Thessalonians 2:16 Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.

There is a reason for

[Shimei]

Re: Atheist fallacies

Let us all pray that God does not kill you before then.
There is certainly nothing that violates the Laws of Nature, which God authored anonymously. The only divine laws that get broken are the ones acknowledged in the Holy Bible.
And look at the civility that always accompanies Christianization! For example, the institutional extermination of queers in Uganda. The enlightened minds of Christian Evangelicals are to thank for that, especially white American ones.

Ha! Thanks for that thought.

And the commandment states that we should go and multiply and be fruitful, in support of your argument... lol, you're stating two things that contradict one another. Homosexuality going against the divine creative order and also nature...

Actually, are we not a minority in world history on how we are socially experimenting with homosexuality? Maybe not, but I mean, perhaps, the other countries are looking in from a different perspective, saying, look you Episcopalians preached the Scripture, but you yourselves do not even practice what you preach. There are issues... Ezekiel 33:31-32

Anyhoot, that's an argument I'll keep distance from because I am unable to separate emotion from the topic at hand in a civil fashion. Besides, I haven't heard anything but social opinion given as opposition to Uganda. All they need do now is do something about the slave trading.

[Billy Bob Jenkins]

Re: Atheist fallacies

Ha! Thanks for that thought.

And the commandment states that we should go and multiply and be fruitful, in support of your argument... lol, you're stating two things that contradict one another. Homosexuality going against the divine creative order and also nature...

What I mean, friend, is that moral laws can be broken, because when you love someone you leave open the possibility that they should burn eternally. Laws of nature on the other hand cannot be broken, but God in His abundant humility, never took credit for this in the Bible. Why would He tell us undiscovered scientific facts, when that would only take away our freedom to disbelieve in His existence and fry forever? These aspects are inextricable from intelligent design. I do not see wherein lies the contradiction.

Anyhoot, that's an argument I'll keep distance from because I am unable to separate emotion from the topic at hand in a civil fashion. Besides, I haven't heard anything but social opinion given as opposition to Uganda. All they need do now is do something about the slave trading.

It's true friend. Some of those slaves are probably stolen, and God demands capital punishment for possession of stolen slaves, no matter what the purpose of the theft was: freeing them, or resale. This is stated plainly in Exodus 21:16. We must all respect the institution of slavery, which God's law also perpetuates in Exodus 21:20-21, Leviticus 25:44-45, and other verses.

[Shimei]

Re: Atheist fallacies

What I mean, friend, is that moral laws can be broken, because when you love someone you leave open the possibility that they should burn eternally. Laws of nature on the other hand cannot be broken, but God in His abundant humility, never took credit for this in the Bible. Why would He tell us undiscovered scientific facts, when that would only take away our freedom to disbelieve in His existence and fry forever? These aspects are inextricable from intelligent design. I do not see wherein lies the contradiction.

It's true friend. Some of those slaves are probably stolen, and God demands capital punishment for possession of stolen slaves, no matter what the purpose of the theft was: freeing them, or resale. This is stated plainly in Exodus 21:16. We must all respect the institution of slavery, which God's law also perpetuates in Exodus 21:20-21, Leviticus 25:44-45, and other verses.

Yea, I can now understand what you are saying. When we love, it is so easy to excuse, ignore or condone sin. We have to be ready to forsake everything and everyone. We have to learn to hate for God or love a little less the things that keep us from Him. But I don't mean to sound like I'm preaching to the choir, because just about everyone here understands what I am sharing.

Back to what I was saying before... is it just me or does it seem as though the homosexual argument appeals to a higher sense of morality or virtue? What is natural could be said to be feelings against homosexuality. Is this really a choice? I mean the opposition towards the life of a homosexual, by the atheist argument, has a natural way of sorting out the most fittest for survival. Yet the contradiction comes into existence when they appeal toward the greater good will of mankind... Don't know if that is clear or not, but it was an aha moment. Another possible fallacy... I'll have to explore this later.

As to your question, why would God tell us undiscovered scientific facts, when that would only take away our freedom to disbelieve in His existence and fry forever?

Ha! man has the ability to freely will himself back to God through His Son despite being predestined to Hell... but you're right, the resurrection falls outside of the natural and rather falls in the supernatural.

I wouldn't put it past God, after all He so loves the world. I'm still using all my mental faculties to deliberately love my enemy in a thoughtful manner or agape. But in my life I'm learning that I have very few enemies, but my enemies appear more to be that of God's. I have to watch being self righteous and make sure that I put myself in a righteous mannerism in God.

I must say that I had a chuckle. Our finite minds cannot even perceive or comprehend His infinite wisdom, yet He still passes it down to us through Scripture. Perhaps the same could be said about Scientific discovery, and through the course of subduing nature... we fulfill one of the first commandments.

Thanks Billy Bob Jenkins, I think that I said too much. It's always easy to tell people how much I don't know, but regardless thank you!

[Billy Bob Jenkins]

Re: Atheist fallacies

Yea, I can now understand what you are saying. When we love, it is so easy to excuse, ignore or condone sin. We have to be ready to forsake everything and everyone. We have to learn to hate for God or love a little less the things that keep us from Him. But I don't mean to sound like I'm preaching to the choir, because just about everyone here understands what I am sharing.

Back to what I was saying before... is it just me or does it seem as though the homosexual argument appeals to a higher sense of morality or virtue? What is natural could be said to be feelings against homosexuality. Is this really a choice? I mean the opposition towards the life of a homosexual, by the atheist argument, has a natural way of sorting out the most fittest for survival. Yet the contradiction comes into existence when they appeal toward the greater good will of mankind... Don't know if that is clear or not, but it was an aha moment. Another possible fallacy... I'll have to explore this later.

As to your question, why would God tell us undiscovered scientific facts, when that would only take away our freedom to disbelieve in His existence and fry forever?

Ha! man has the ability to freely will himself back to God through His Son despite being predestined to Hell... but you're right, the resurrection falls outside of the natural and rather falls in the supernatural.

I wouldn't put it past God, after all He so loves the world. I'm still using all my mental faculties to deliberately love my enemy in a thoughtful manner or agape. But in my life I'm learning that I have very few enemies, but my enemies appear more to be that of God's. I have to watch being self righteous and make sure that I put myself in a righteous mannerism in God.

I must say that I had a chuckle. Our finite minds cannot even perceive or comprehend His infinite wisdom, yet He still passes it down to us through Scripture. Perhaps the same could be said about Scientific discovery, and through the course of subduing nature... we fulfill one of the first commandments.

Thanks Billy Bob Jenkins, I think that I said too much. It's always easy to tell people how much I don't know, but regardless thank you!

The liberal/atheist/scientific argument is that homosexuality is biological, not that it is genetic. But since Jesus and I conflate the words genetic and biological, there is no difference. You say potato I say poe-tah-toe.

I promise you that the scientific discovery that homosexuality is biological is in no wise conducive to eternal life. This non-doctrinal speculation about science being a fulfillment of God's will may be amusing now, but will it be amusing to have your flesh burned off again and again for ever and ever? I am only looking out for your well being when I say such things, friend; I mean no offense.

My question about the notable absence of scientific facts in the Bible was rhetorical. Obviously the reason there were no scientific contributions in the Bible, and only rough mathematical estimations, is because God knows better than to believe liberal elites.

[Pastor Isaac Peters]

Re: Atheist fallacies

Misplacing the burden of proof. When atheists make an affirmative statement, e.g., that the universe came into being purely through natural mechanisms or that sodomania is caused by something other than idolatry (Romans 1:22-27), they bear the burden of proof. Instead, they commit this fallacy by trying to shift the burden of proof to us.